Busing —Not Integration— Opposed:
Invoke Our Color-Blind Constitution to End It

   Previous Next

This book,  Busing —Not Integration— Opposed: Invoke Our Color-Blind Constitution to End It, emerges from the author's long pro bono representation of San Diego "busing dissenters" in the Carlin v. Board of Education desegregation case. It presents the constitutional objections invoked by student - parent - taxpayer - citizens, individually and as a group, which have successfully stood as a barrier to "forced" busing in the San Diego Unified School District since their intervention in December, 1980.

As the title reflects, their constitutional opposition has been directed toward mandatory school assignments, solely on a racial basis, of innocent, objecting students (known simply as "busing"); not to other, lawful, means of integrating schools. This unique invoking of constitutional protection offers those still adversely affected by busing in other schools a means of ending it. This is because similarly situated student-parent-taxpayer-citizens can assert constitutional objections that the school boards, who are the named defendants in these cases, do not, or cannot, raise.

The Solicitor General, before the Supreme Court on October 9, 1990, appearing in behalf of the United States as amicus curiae in support of the effort of the Oklahoma City school board to reduce busing in that city, referred to the "hundreds of school desegregation decrees" issued in the country. Many of those decrees are still in effect where, as there, busing has continued upwards of twenty years, leaving busing dissenters in those public schools with no alternative, besides flight, but to invoke their constitutional rights after the San Diego fashion, in the absence of school board action. And school boards, not being vulnerable in the same sense as are those subjected to busing, generally have been unwilling to face opposition to termination of busing such as the Oklahoma City board faced.

Also, national educational goals are jeopardized by the continuing disregard of the "local control" principle, exemplified by the hundreds of public schools remaining indefinitely under undemocratic busing orders,

To facilitate referencing, online pagination matches the printed book.
Carlin Carlin v. Board of Education, San Diego Superior Court, No. 303800 (1967-1998)
San Diego, California
Dowell Dowell v. Bd. of Educ. of Okl. City Public Schools,
(10th Cir. 1989), 890 F.2d 1483
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
  Busing: Foreword, pages v - vii — Previous Next
Busing —Not Integration— Opposed
Invoke our Color-Blind Constitution to End It

A Reasoned Opposition to Race-Based
Affirmative Action in Public Schools
by Elmer Enstrom, Jr.
History of the 30-year Carlin affirmative action lawsuit:
a pro bono case history of applying Constitutional principles.
© 1998-2006, 2013 Enstrom Foundation www.EnstromFoundation.org Bookmark and Share