On March 31, 1992 parents in San Diego and many other parents with children in public schools under court supervision in “desegregation” class actions welcomed the Supreme Court decision in Freeman v. Pitts. For it held that court supervision derived in such actions over student assignments be returned to the control of local authorities “at the earliest practicable date.”

To many parents, this meant the return to local control of the education of their children and would allow them to participate regarding student assignment and other decision-making to fit local needs, as called for in the 1991 high court decision in Board of Ed. of Oklahoma City v. Dowell. Many parents in San Diego had long opposed racial assignments of their children, sought since 1967 in Carlin v. Board of Education, a “desegregation” class action. As their pro bono counsel from May 12, 1979 until the case ended in 1998, I had continuously presented their opposition to racial balancing in that case, and their support for a return of local control so they could have a meaningful voice in the assignments of their children.

Their group, called “Groundswell,” together with individual San Diego parents and children, intervened in the Carlin case on December 15, 1980. As their counsel, I raised two major objections to racial student assignments in a school district in which there never had been a finding of de jure segregation.

First, that such assignments racially discriminated against such nonconsenting students and their parents, in violation of the California Constitution which applied federal decisional law requiring a finding of intentional segregation; and of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in a district receiving federal funds.

Second, that continuing judicial authority governing such assignments infringed upon the constitutional right of the Groundswell Intervenors “to the governing participation to which they are entitled” in the operation of the District.

On September 10, 1981 the Los Angeles Superior Court terminated jurisdiction over the Los Angeles Unified School District to end litigation
 

To facilitate referencing, online pagination matches the printed book.

Carlin v. Board of Education, San Diego Unified School District,
San Diego Superior Court No. 303800 (1967-1998)
San Diego, California
Enstrom: pro bono counsel, 1979-1998
 

Board of Education v. Superior Court, 61 Cal.App.4th 411 (Feb.1998)
[conclusion of Carlin v. Board of Education]
San Diego, California
Enstrom: pro bono counsel
 

— Handbook: Foreword, pages v - ix —