Correspondence from Kelley to Judge Roth

1 page

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Impact area
- Education
Topic
- School Desegregation
LDF Attorney
- Norman J. Chachkin
Cooperating Attorneys
Organizations
Matter
- Milliken v. Bradley
Case
- Milliken v. Bradley
U.S. state
- Michigan
Collection
- Case Files
Taxonomy
Identifier
- ef744b75-53e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0

Cite this item

Case Files, Milliken Hardbacks. Correspondence from Kelley to Judge Roth, 1972. 27b616bd-52e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/450788a2-22fc-4f99-8029-35dc989f4fbb/correspondence-from-kelley-to-judge-roth. Accessed April 05, 2025.

Copied!

    L e o n  S. C o h a n  
Deputy Attorney General

F R A N K  J. KELLEY
A T T O R N E Y  G E N E R A L

LANSING 
4 8 9 1 3

February 25, 1972

Honorable Stephen J. Roth 
United States District Court 
700 Church Street 
Flint, Michigan 48502

Re: Bradley v. Milliken - No. 35257
Dear Judge Roth:

Responding to Mr. Roumell’s letter of February 23,
1972 to this Court, dealing with the question of holding 
hearings on intra-district and metropolitan remedies, we must 
inform the Court that, in our view, the necessity of a metro
politan remedy may not be established simply by agreement or
-T * -  A -r- - - “» r-, 4 - .! .y- , -  -  -r* 4 .  v ,  -> v * -f- 4  4- ?  • %,7r\ h? x Jt 4-  -T 4  -
U WJ*U '“'J- Viii- pcix 0-LO O • r Ui UiV-iA y i/»C U.O I I KS  O Xii UCilU L/ W JW-L.XXin any such stipulation. •

Rather, we think the Court must hold a hearing and make 
findings concerning the legal infirmities, if any, in the 
proposed intra-district remedies now before the Court. The 
plaintiffs have prepared and submitted to the Court a compre
hensive plan for an intra-district remedy. We believe it is 
incumbent upon plaintiffs, if they desire a metropolitan remedy, 
to meet their burden of demonstrating to the Court the consti
tutional defects, if any, in the proposed intra-district plans 
for desegregation now before the Court.

Finally, it is our view that in the absence of competent 
evidence and a finding by the Court that (1) the present school 
district boundary lines were established and maintained with 
the purpose and intent and have the effect of perpetuating 
racial segregation, and (2) the metropolitan districts practice 
segregation, this Court may not properly grant plaintiffs a 
metropolitan remedy. Bradley v School Board of City of Richmond,
___F Supp ___ (ED Va, Jan. 5, 1972), pp 57-59 and 67 of memorandum
opinion.

Very truly yours,
FRANK J. KELLEY 
Attorney ̂ General
Eugene Krasicky y

sistant Attorney General
A



Hon. Stephen J. Roth 
Page 2 - February 25, 1972

cc: Messrs. Louis R. Lucas
and William E. Caldwell 
Mr. E. Winther McCroom 
Mr. Nathaniel R. Jones 
Messrs. J. Harold Falannery,

Paul R. Dimond and Robert Pressman 
Messrs. Jack Greenberg and 

Norman J. Chachkin 
Mr. George T. Roumell3 Jr.
Mr. Theodore Sachs
Mr. Alexander B. Ritchie

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Certificate of Service

Impact area

Topic

LDF Attorney

Cooperating Attorneys

Organizations

Matter

Case

U.S. state

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in