Parental Handbook
for Local Control of Education  /  Challenge Four
  
58

San Diego Intervenors
Challenge Court Assignment of Pupils
in Carlin v. Board of Education
Toward Restoring Local Control
of San Diego Public Schools

PreviousNext

concurrence in Freeman (1992), 112 S.Ct. 1430, at 1450-51:

The District Court in the present case found that the imbalances in student assignment were attributable to private demographic shifts rather than governmental action. Without disturbing this finding, and without finding that revision of student assignments was necessary to remedy some other unlawful government action, the Court of Appeals ordered DeKalb County to institute massive busing and other programs to achieve integration. The Court convincingly demonstrates that this cannot be reconciled with our cases, and I join its opinion....

Almost a quarter-century ago, in Green v. School Bd., New Kent County, 391 U.S. 430, 437-438…(1968), this Court held that school systems which had been enforcing de jure segregation at the time of Brown I had not merely an obligation to assign students and resources on a race-neutral basis but also an "affirmative duty" to "desegregate," that is to achieve insofar as practicable racial balance in their schools. This holding has become such a part of our legal fabric that there is a tendency, reflected in the Court of Appeals opinion in this case, to speak as though the Constitution requires such racial balancing. Of course it does not: The Equal Protection Clause reaches only those racial imbalances shown to be intentionally caused by the State....
 

New Facts and Law Support Reconsideration

For the hearing on the Motion for Reconsideration, rescheduled December 15, 1995, intervening events were summarized for the Court in a supplemental memorandum, the key event being the rendering on June 12, 1995 of Missouri v. Jenkins, 115 S.Ct. 2033, 132 L.Ed 2d 63.

Intervenors also argued that Jenkins made it clear that Freeman offered no support for the retention of judicial jurisdiction until the academic goals sought in behalf of minority students were met in that case, quoting Chief Justice Rehnquist:

“Insistence upon academic goals unrelated to the effects of legal segregation unwarrantably postpones the day when theNext
 


Brown I 

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
Topeka, Kansas
 

Carlin  

Carlin v. Board of Education, San Diego Unified School District,
San Diego Superior Court No. 303800 (1967-1998)
San Diego, California
 

Green 

Green v. County School Board, 391 U.S. 430 (1968)
New Kent County, Virginia
 

Freeman 

Freeman v. Pitts, 503 U.S. 467, 112 S.Ct. 1430 (1992)
DeKalb County School System (DCSS),
DeKalb County, Georgia
 

Jenkins 

Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70, 115 S. Ct. 2033 (1995)
Kansas City, Missouri
 

         

Handbook: Challenge Four, pages 55 - 63 —

PreviousNext
  

Parental Handbook
For Parents Dedicated to Local Control
of Public Education of Children
According to the Constitution
by Elmer Enstrom, Jr.
Contents
Challenges of the 30-year Carlin affirmative action lawsuit:
an exemplar of citizens reasserting Constitutional rights.
  
© 1998-2006, 2013 Enstrom Foundation www.EnstromFoundation.org Bookmark and Share