… It sustained the decision of the district court in terminating jurisdiction over student assignments in a formerly de jure segregated system, again ruling that there is no duty to remedy racial imbalance caused by demographic factors.

And, finally, we cited Dowell as follows:

The Board should resume its 1981 arguments, made more powerful by an additional ten years' compliance with court orders, in support of termination of this 24-year old case. As said by the Supreme Court in 1991 in Board of Educ. of Oklahoma City P.Sch. v. Dowell, 111 S.Ct. 630 at 637, desegregation decrees are not intended to operate in perpetuity. Local control over the education of children allows citizens to participate in decision making.

On May 28, the Court denied the motion, citing Freeman as allowing relinquishment of judicial jurisdiction incrementally, concluding:

If I felt that there was a serious and real controversy existing, there were actual incidents of lack of access to the Board by parents or students, or clear evidence of deprivation of constitutional rights because of the order, because of the jurisdiction, I would certainly entertain terminating it. But I think it's just to the contrary.

On July 13, 1992, I filed a Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate with the Fourth District Court of Appeal in behalf of the association Groundswell and one of the citizen intervenors, asserting mainly the continuous denial of citizen rights while the Court retained jurisdiction pending an appeal. The appellate court denied the petition ten days later without comment.

The odds were against timely perfection of an appeal due to the