Parents Can Challenge Perpetual
Court Assignment of Pupils,
In Pending Class Actions,
Toward Restoring Local Control
According to the Constitution

Unitary status having been achieved, the judgment of the district court vacating and dissolving all prior injunctive orders and decrees is affirmed. The Board is to operate the school system without the strictures of these decrees no later than the 2002-2003 school year. Id. at 6,7 (also see 269 F.3d at 311).

The majority opinion, in rendering that judgment, sustained the district court's finding that CMS had achieved unitary status in all the Green categories, and notably “the most critical Green factor” of student assignment:

In sum, the district court's findings on student assignment are “plausible in light of the record viewed in its entirety.” Anderson, 470 U.S. at 573. The dual system of student assignment in CMS has been eradicated “to the extent practicable.” Dowell, 498 U.S. at 250... Id. at 29 (also see 269 F.3d at 324).

In arriving at its judgment, the Fourth Circuit provided a citation-guide available to parents and their counsel elsewhere seeking to restore local control after lengthy court supervision:

In undertaking a unitary status inquiry, a court must ask “whether the Board ha(s) complied in good faith with the desegregation decree since it was entered, and whether the vestiges of past discrimination ha(ve) been eliminated to the extent practicable.” Board of Educ. v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237,249-50 (1991). Implicit in the Supreme Court's use of the word “practicable” is a reasonable limit on the duration of... federal supervision. Coalition to Save Our Children v. State Bd. of Educ., 90 F.3d 752,760 (3d Cir. 1996); see also Dowell, 498 U.S. at 247 (“From the very first, federal supervision of local school systems was intended as a temporary measure to remedy past discrimination.”) Hence, the goals of a desegregation order not only encompass a remedy for the violation, but also prompt restoration of local control. See Freeman, 503 U.S. at 490 (Returning schools to the control of local authorities at the earliest practicable date is essential to restore their true accountability in our
 

Green 

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

Anderson 

Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 US 564, 573 (1985)
 

Dowell 

Board of Ed. of Oklahoma City v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237 (1990)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
 

Freeman 

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

Coalition to Save Our Children v. State Bd. of Educ.,
90 F.3d 752,760 (3d Cir. 1996)
New Castle County, Delaware
 

Belk 

Belk v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education,
Docket No. 99-2389, U.S. Court of Appeals, 4th Cir.,
269 F.3d 305, 311, 324 (9/21/2001)
Charlotte, North Carolina
 

— Handbook: Challenge Six, pages 75 - 84 —