Carr v. Montgomery County Board of Education Brief for Appellants
Public Court Documents
April 17, 1970
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Washington State v. Seattle School District No. 1 Brief Amicus Curiae NAACP Legal Defense Fund, 1981. 028d4597-c89a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/5e8610e7-bf8b-4d80-b587-766c7270493a/washington-state-v-seattle-school-district-no-1-brief-amicus-curiae-naacp-legal-defense-fund. Accessed August 19, 2025.
Copied!
Xw th e
S>upr£m? fflourt of % Intteii States
O ctober T erm , 1981
No. 81-9
S tate of IV ash in g to n , et al.,
v.
Appellants,
S eattle S chool D istrict No. 1, et al.,
Appellees.
OH APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF AS
AMICUS CURIAE AND BRIEF OF THE NAACP
LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC.,
AS AMICUS CURIAE
J ac k Greenberg
J ames M. N abrit, I II
B ill L a n k L ee*
J am es S. L iebm an
Suite 2030
10 Columbus Circle
New York, New York 10019
(212) 586-8397
Attorneys for NAACP Legal
Defense <§ Educational Fund,
as Amicus Curiae
* Counsel o f Record
INDEX
Table o f A u t h o r i t i e s ............................... i i i
Motion For Leave For NAACP Legal
Defense and Educat iona l Fund,
Page
I n c . , To F i l e A B r i e f
Amicus Curiae .................................... 1
Question Presented .................................... 6
B r i e f For the NAACP Legal Defense
and Educat iona l Fund, I n c . ,
as Amicus Curiae ............................. 7
Summary o f Argument ................................. 7
Argument ........................................................... 9
I . I n i t i a t i v e 350 V i o l a t e s
The Fourteenth Amendment's
Most Bas ic P r o h i b i t i o n By
S t r u c t u r in g The P o l i t i c a l
Process So That Governmental
A c t i o n B e n e f i t in g The Minor
i t y V ic t im s Of School Segre
g a t i o n Is More D i f f i c u l t To
Achieve Than Governmental
A c t i o n B e n e f i t in g A l l Other
C i t i z e n s .................................................... 9
A. R a c ia l C l a s s i f i c a
t i o n s D i s t o r t i n g the
P o l i t i c a l Process ...................... 12
B. Hunter v. Er ickson .......... 15
i
Page
C. Nyquist v. Lee ................... 27
D. I n i t i a t i v e 350 ................... 34
I I . R a c ia l I n t e a r a t i o n Of
P u b l i c Education In Appel
l e e Loca l D i s t r i c t s , Which
I n i t i a t i v e 350 Nonneutral ly
F r u s t r a t e s , Is A L e g i t im a te ,
Indeed P r e s s in g , P o l i t i c a l
O b j e c t i v e o f Black C i t i z e n s
In A p p e l l e e Schoo l D i s t r i c t s . . . 47
C onc lus ion 56
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases: Page
Alexander v. Holmes County
Board o f Educat ion , 396 U.S.
19 ( 1 969) .................................................... 3 ,49
Avery v. Midland County,
390 U.S. 474 ( 1 968) ............................. 13
B o l l i n a v. Sharpe,
347 U.S. 499 ( 1 954) . .......................... 10
Brown v. Board o f Educat ion ,
347 U.S. 483 ( 1 954) ............................. 3
Crawford v. Board o f Education
o f the C i t y o f Los A nge les ,
No. 8 1-38 ........................ ............................ 23
C i t i z e n s Against Mandatory
Bussinq v. Palmason,
495 P. 2d 657 (Wash. 1 972) ............. 36,37
Columbus Board o f Education
v. P en ick , 443 U.S. 449
(1979) .................................................... 3 , 5 , 2 3 , 2 4
31,54
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1
(1958) .................................................... 3
Dayton Board o f Education v.
Brinkman, 433 U.S. 406
( 1 977) ........................................................... 18
Dunn v. Blumstein,
405 U.S. 330 ( 1972) ............................. 12
- iii -
Page
Evans v. Buchanan, 398
F. Supp. 428 (D. Del.)r
a f f ' d , 423 U.S. 963 (1975) ............ 30
Ex p a r te V i r g i n i a , 100 U.S.
339 ( 1 880) .................................................. 10
Fo ley v. C on n e l i e , 435 U.S.
291 ( 1 978) .................................................. 1 1
Green v. County Schoo l Board, 391
U.S. 430 ( 1 968) ................. ............. 3
Harper v. V i r g i n i a Board
o f E l e c t o r s , 383 U.S.
663 ( 1 966) ........................ ......................... 12
Hunter v . E r ickson ,
393 U.S. 385 ( 1 969) ....... .................... passim
In re G r i f f i t h s ,
413 U.S. 717 ( 1973) ............................. 1 1
James v. V a l t i e r r a ,
402 U.S. 1 37 ( 1 971 ) ............................. 44
Keyes v. School D i s t r i c t No. 1,
413 U.S. 1 89 ( 1 973) ------ ---------- 3
Lovinq v. V i r g i n i a ,
388 U.S. 1 ( 1 967) ................................. 10
Massachusetts Board o f
Ret irement v. Murgia,
427 U.S. 307 (1 976) ............................. 1 1
IV
Page
McDaniel v. B a r r e s i ,
402 U.S. 39 ( 1971 ) ............................... 48
McLauqhlin v. F l o r i d a ,
379 U.S. 39 ( 1971 ) ............................... 10
M i l l ik e n v. Bradley ,
418 U.S. 717 ( 1 974) ............................. 27,35
Mobile v. Bolden,
446 U.S. 55 ( 1 980) ................... 1 1,1 4 ,2 2 ,4 5
New York G a s l iq h t Club, Inc . v.
Carey, 447 U.S. 54 (1980) ____ 5
Nixon v. Herndon,
273 U.S. 536 ( 1927) .......................... 1 1,1 2,31
North C aro l in a Sta te Board
o f Educat ion v. Swann,
402 U.S. 43 ( 1971 ) ............................. 2 4 ,2 8 ,4 9
Nyquist v . Lee, 401 U.S. 935
a f f 1g , 318 F. Supp. 710
(W.D~N.Y. 1970) ...................................... passim
Personnel A dm in is t ra tor v.
Feeney, 442 U.S. 256
( 1979) ........................................................... 22,44
Regents o f the U n iv e r s i t y o f
C a l i f o r n i a v. Bakke, 438
U.S. 265 ( 1 978) ...................................... 47
Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S.
533 ( 1 964) .................................................. 13
v
Paae
San Antonio School D i s t . v .
Rodr iquez , 411 U.S. 1
( 1973) ................................. .................... . 11 ,25 ,34
S e a t t l e Schoo l D i s t . No. 1
v. Washington, 473 F. Supp.
996 (W.D. Wash. 1979), a f f ' d ,
633 F .2d 1338 (9th C ir .
1980) ......................................................... 3 6 , 3 7 ,4 0 ,
41,42
Slaughterhouse Cases,
83^U.S. 36 (1973) ............................. 10
S ta te ex r e l . Lukens v.
Spokane Schoo l D i s t r i c t 81,
147 Wash. 467 ( 1 928 ) ................... . 36
Strauder v. West V i r g i n i a ,
100 U.S. 303 ( 1880) ................. . . . 10
Swann v . C har lo t te -M eck lenburg
Board o f Educat ion , 402 U.S.
1 (1971) .................................................. 3 , 2 8 , 4 1 ,
48,49
Takahashi v. Fish and Game
Comm'n, 334 U.S. 410 (1948) . . . 11
United S ta te s v. Carolene
Products C o . , 304 U.S.
144 ( 1 938) ........................................ .. 10,25
V i l l a g e o f A r l in g t o n Heights
v. M e tro p o l i tan Housing
A u t h o r i t y , 429 U.S. 252
(1977) ....................................................... 44
- v i -
Page
Washinqton v. Davis , 426 U.S.
229 ( 1976) .................................................. 44
White v. R e g e s te r , 412 U.S.
755 ( 1 973) .................................................. 1 1,12
Wright v. Counci l o f the
C i ty o f Emporia, 407 U.S.
451 ( 1 972) .................................................. 23,24
Other A u t h o r i t i e s :
Buses: Backbone o f Urban T r a n s i t ,
The American C i t y , Dec. 1974 . . . . 50
120 Cong. Rec. 8757 ( 1 974) ................. 50
Davis , Bussing, in 2 R. Crain ,
e t a l . , Southern S c h o o l s : An
Evaluat ion o f the Emergency
School A s s i s t a n c e Program and
o f School D esegregat ion ( 1 9 7 3 ) . . . 51
Department o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ,
T ra n sp o r ta t io n o f School
Chi ldren (1972) ...................................... 50
G. Gunther, Cases and M ater ia ls
on C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Law
(9th Ed. 1975) ......................................... 26
W. Hawley, e t a l . , 1 Assessment
o f Current Knowledge About
The E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f School
D esegregat ion S t r a t e g i e s ,
S t r a t e g i e s f o r E f f e c t i v e
D e segrega t ion : A Synthes is
o f Findings (1981) 5 2 ,5 3 ,5 4
Page
Hawley, "The False Premises o f
Ant i -Bus ing L e g i s l a t i o n , "
test imony b e f o r e the Subcom.
on Separat ion o f Powers,
Sen. Com. on the J u d i c i a r y ,
97th Cong . , 1st Sess .
(September 30, 1981) ...................... 5 2 ,5 4 ,5 5
M e tro p o l i ta n Appl ied Research
Center , Busing Task Force
Fact Book ( 1 972 ) ................................... 49
The New York Times,
Dec. 4, 1980 .................................... 50
N at iona l A s s o c i a t i o n o f Motor
Bus Owners, Bus Facts (39th
ed. 1 972) .................................................. 50
G. O r f i e l d , Must We Bus? (1978) . . 49,50
C. R o s s e l l , e t a l . , 5 Assessment
o f Current Knowledge About
the E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f School
D esegregat ion S t r a t e g i e s ,
A Review o f the Empir ica l
Research on D e se g re ga t io n :
Community Response, Race
R e l a t i o n s , Academic A ch ie v e
ment and R esegreg a t ion (1981) . . 5 3 ,5 4 ,5 5
U.S. Commission on C i v i l R ig h t s ,
P u b l i c Knowledge and Busing
O p p o s i t io n (1973) ............................... 50
Z o l o t h , The Impact o f Busing on
Student Achievement, 7 Growth
& Change 45 (Ju ly 1976) ................. 51
- viii
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
October Term, 1981
No. 81-9
STATE OF WASHINGTON, e t a l . ,
A p p e l l a n t s ,
v.
SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.-1, e t a l . ,
A p p e l l e e s .
On Appeal From The United S ta te s Court
o f Appeals For The Ninth C i r c u i t
MOTION FOR LEAVE FOR THE NAACP LEGAL
DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC.,
TO FILE A BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE
The NAACP L e g a l D e fe n s e and Educa
t i o n a l Fund, I n c . , h e r e b y r e s p e c t f u l l y
moves f o r ~ l e a v e to f i l e the attached b r i e f
amicus cu r ia e in t h i s case . Counsel f o r
a p p e l l e e s , t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , and t h e
S e a t t l e i n t e r v e n o r - p l a i n t i f f s - a p p e l l e e s
2
have c o n s e n t e d t o the f i l i n g o f th e a t
tached b r i e f . The consent o f the a t t o r n e y
f o r a p p e l la n t s was r e q u e s te d , but r e f u s e d ,
thus n e c e s s i t a t i n g t h i s moion.
1. The NAACP L e g a l D e f e n s e and
Educat iona l Fund, I n c . , ( h e r e i n a f t e r "LDF")
i s a n o n - p r o f i t c o r p o r a t i o n e s t a b l i s h e d
under the laws o f the S ta te o f New York.
I t was formed to a s s i s t b la ck persons to
s ecure t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s by the
p r o s e c u t i o n o f l a w s u i t s . I t s c h a r t e r
d e c l a r e s that i t s purposes in c lu d e re n d e r
ing l e g a l s e r v i c e s g r a t u i t o u s l y t o b lack
persons s u f f e r i n g i n j u s t i c e by reason o f
r a c i a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . LDF i s independent
o f o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s and i s supported by
c o n t r i b u t i o n s from the p u b l i c .
2. For many y e a r s a t t o r n e y s o f th e
Legal Defense Fund have rep resen ted p a r
t i e s in l i t i g a t i o n b e f o r e t h i s Court and
3
th e l o w e r c o u r t s i n v o l v i n g a v a r i e t y o f
r a c e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i s s u e s , i n c l u d i n g
la w s u i t s brought on b e h a l f o f b la ck parents
and s tudents t o d e seg rega te p u b l i c s c h o o l s .
E . g . , Brown v. Board o f E d u ca t io n , 347 U.S.
483 ( 1 9 5 4 ) ; C oop er v . A a r o n , 358 U .S . 1
(1 9 5 8 ) ; Green v. County School Board, 391
U.S. 430 (1 9 6 8 ) ; Alexander v. Holmes County
Board o f E d u c a t i o n , 396 U .S . 19 ( 1 9 6 9 ) ;
Swann v. Char lo t te -M eck lenburg Board o f Ed
u c a t i o n , 402 U.S. 1 (1 9 7 1 ) ; Keyes v. School
D i s t r i c t No. 1 , 413 U.S. 189 ( 1 973) . The
Legal Defense Fund a l s o has p a r t i c i p a t e d as
amicus c u r i a e in numerous d e s e g r e g a t i o n
cases in t h i s Court. E . g . , Columbus Board
o f E d u c a t i o n v .__P e n i c k , 443 U . S . 449
(1 9 7 9 ) ; Regents o f the U n iv e r s i t y o f C a l i -
f o r n i a v . B a k k e , 4 38 U . S . 2 6 5 ( 1 9 7 8 ) .
4
3. Amicus a l s o r e p r e s e n t s b l a c k
p a r e n t s and s c h o o l c h i l d r e n in numerous
pending lower cou r t c a s e s . Those parents
and c h i l d r e n have a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t and
concern in encouraging l o c a l s c h o o l d i s
t r i c t s t o undertake v o lu n ta ry " a f f i r m a t i v e
a c t i o n " p r o g r a m s t o d e s e g r e g a t e t h e i r
s t u d e n t b o d i e s and f a c i l i t i e s w i t h o u t
undergoing f u l l - b l o w n l i t i g a t i o n , which i s
o f t e n t a x in g , t ime-consuming and e x p e n s iv e .
LDF a l s o has an i n t e r e s t in sa fegu a rd in g
the r i g h t o f b lack parents and o t h e r b lack
c i t i z e n s , as e x e r c i s e d h e r e , t o s e e k
re d re s s o f g r ie v a n ce s and t o o b t a in f a v o r
a b l e g o v e r n m e n t a l a c t i o n t h r o u g h t h e
p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s on the same b a s i s as a l l
o t h e r c i t i z e n s . As th e a t t a c h e d b r i e f
p o in t s o u t , amicus b e l i e v e s that both these
i n t e r e s t s w i l l be im per i led i f I n i t i v i v e
350 i s upheld.
5
4. Amicus r e s p e c t f u l l y submits that
i t s long e x p e r i e n ce in s c h o o l d e s e g r e g a t i o n
m a t t e r s and i t s f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h t h e
s o c i a l - s c i e n c e data on the su cce s s o f d e
s e g r e g a t i o n remedies may a s s i s t the Court
* /m r e s o l v i n g t h i s m a t t e r . -
^_/ The s o l e o b j e c t i o n o f a p p e l l a n t s '
cou n se l t o LDF's p a r t i c i p a t i o n as amicus —
that LDF's p e r s p e c t i v e i s rep resen ted here
by the S e a t t l e , Washington Branch o f the
N at ion a l A s s o c i a t i o n f o r the Advancement o f
C o l o r e d P e o p l e (NAACP), one o f s e v e r a l
p 1 a i n t i f f - i n t e r v e n o r s - - i s m i s t a k e n .
Although o r i g i n a l l y founded by the NAACP,
LDF has been a wholly separa te o r g a n i z a t i o n
from the NAACP f o r over 20 y e a r s , with a
s e p a r a t e Board o f D i r e c t o r s , program o f
o p e r a t i o n s , s t a f f , o f f i c e and b u d g e t .
Moreover, while the NAACP i s p a r t i c i p a t i n g
in t h i s case s o l e l y on b e h a l f o f i t s members
in S e a t t l e , Washington, LDF seeks t o p a r t i
c i p a t e in o rd e r t o rep resen t the i n t e r e s t s
o f i t s c l i e n t s in s c h o o l d e s e g r e g a t i o n
l i t i g a t i o n t h r o u g h o u t th e c o u n t r y . For
these re a s o n s , LDF has been perm itted to
p a r t i c i p a t e as amicus cu r ia e in cases in
which the NAACP was a l s o a m i c u s , e . g . ,
R e g e n t s o f the U n iv e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a v .
Ba k ke , s u p r a , and i n c a s e s in w h i c h
NAACP a t t o r n e y s r e p r e s e n t e d one o f the
p a r t i e s , e . g . , Columbus Board o f Education
v. P e n i c k , s u p r a ; New York G a s l ig h t C lub ,
In c , v . Carey, 447 U.S. 54 (19 80 ) .
6
WHEREFORE, f o r the f o r e g o i n g re a s o n s ,
amicus c u r ia e NAACP Legal Defense and Edu
c a t i o n a l Fund, I n c . prays that the at tached
b r i e f be permitted t o be f i l e d .
R e s p e c t f u l l y s u b m i t t e d ,
JACK GREENBERG
JAMES M. NABRIT, I I I
BILL LANN LEE*
JAMES S. LIEBMAN
Suite 2030
10 Columbus C i r c l e
New York, New York 10019
(212)586-8397
*Counsel o f Record
Attorneys f o r NAACP Legal
Defense & Educat iona l Fund,
as Amicus Curiae
QUESTION PRESENTED
Does I n i t i a t i v e 350 v i o l a t e the Four
teenth Amendment by s t r u c t u r i n g the p o l i t i
c a l p r o c e s s o f the Sta te o f Washington so
t h a t g o v e r n m e n t a l a c t i o n b e n e f i t i n g th e
m in o r i t y v i c t im s o f s c h o o l s e g r e g a t i o n i s
more d i f f i c u l t t o a ch ieve than governmental
a c t i o n b e n e f i t i n g a l l o t h e r c i t i z e n s ?
7
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
October Term, 1981
No. 81-9
STATE OF WASHINGTON, e t a l . ,
A p p e l l a n t s ,
v.
SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, e t a l . ,
A p p e l l e e s .
On Appeal From The United S ta te s Court
o f Appeals For The Ninth C i r c u i t
BRIEF OF THE NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND
EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC., AS AMICUS CURIAE
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Amicus r e s p e c t f u l l y submits that t h i s
appeal i s governed by the fundamental Four
t e e n t h Amendment p r i n c i p l e t h a t a s t a t e
must maintain p o l i t i c a l n e u t r a l i t y among
the races and may not burden m in o r i t y -g r o u p
p o l i t i c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n by r e q u i r i n g r a c i a l
8
m i n o r i t i e s to u t i l i z e more onerous means
than a l l o th e r c i t i z e n s to o b t a i n govern
mental a c t i o n on t h e i r b e h a lv e s . Hunter
v, E r i c k s o n , 393 U.S. 385 (1 9 6 9 ) ; Nyquist
v . L e e , 401 U.S. 935 ( 1 97 1 ) , a f f ' g 318
F. Supp. 710 (W.D.N.Y. 1 970) . The f a t a l
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l d e f e c t o f I n i t i a t i v e 350 i s
that i t i s a " s t a t u t e [] which s t r u c t u r e [ s ]
the in t e r n a l governmental p r o c e s s " in such
a way as to "make[] i t more d i f f i c u l t f o r
r a c i a l . . . m i n o r i t i e s " than f o r a l l o th e r
c i t i z e n s t o " f u r t h e r t h e i r p o l i t i c a l a im s . "
Hunter v . E r i c k s o n , s u p r a , 393 U.S. at 393
(Harlan, J. , c o n c u r r i n g ) . Because Hunter
and N y q u i s t v . Lee are d i s p o s i t i v e , we
l i m i t Part I o f t h i s b r i e f t o a d i s c u s s i o n
o f the a p p l i c a t i o n here o f the p r i n c i p l e
which animates those c a s e s .
Part I I b r i e f l y d i s c u s s e s the r e c e n t
s o c i a l s c i e n t i f i c data e s t a b l i s h i n g that
d e s e g r e g a t i o n o f p u b l i c s c h o o l s i s a
- 9 -
l e g i t i m a t e , in d e e d p r e s s i n g , p o l i t i c a l
g o a l o f m i n o r i t i e s , which has s u c c e e d e d
o v e r t h e p a s t f i f t e e n y e a r s i n d r a m a
t i c a l l y im p r o v in g a c a d e m ic a c h ie v e m e n t
among b lacks and race r e l a t i o n s among a l l
s t u d e n t s .
ARGUMENT
I
INITIATIVE 350 VIOLATES THE FOUR
TEENTH AMENDMENT'S MOST BASIC
PROHIBITION BY STRUCTURING THE
POLITICAL PROCESS SO THAT GOVERN
MENTAL ACTION BENEFITING THE MINORITY
VICTIMS OF SCHOOL SEGREGATION IS MORE
DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE THAN GOVERN
MENTAL ACTION BENEFITING ALL OTHER
CITIZENS
In i t s most fu n d a m en ta l a s p e c t , th e
Equal P r o t e c t i o n Clause o f the Fourteenth
Amendment f o r b i d s the Sta tes from p ass in g
laws, not born o f a com pe l l ing n e c e s s i t y ,
t h a t c l a s s i f y b l a c k s o r o t h e r r a c i a l
m i n o r i t i e s d i f f e r e n t l y , and l e s s a d -
10
v a n t a g e o u s l y , than a l l o t h e r c i t i z e n s ,
S 1 a u g h t e r h o u s e C a s e s , 83 U . S . 3 6 , 71
( 1 8 7 3 ) ; S t r a u d e r v . West V i r g i n i a , 100
U .S . 303 , 3 07 -0 8 ( 1 8 8 0 ) ; Ex p a r t e V i r
g i n i a , 100 U . S . 3 3 9 , 3 4 4 - 4 5 ( 1 8 8 0 ) ;
B o l l i n g v . S h a r p e , 347 U .S . 499 ( 1 9 5 4 ) ;
McLaughlin v . F l o r i d a , 379 U.S. 184, 192
(1 9 6 4 ) ; Loving v. V i r g i n i a , 388 U.S. 1, 10
(1 9 6 7 ) . This deep m is t r u s t o f l e g i s l a t i v e
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s s i n g l i n g o u t b l a c k s o r
o t h e r r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s d e r iv e s from a r e
c o g n i t i o n that " p r e j u d i c e a g a in s t d i s c r e t e
and i n s u l a r m i n o r i t i e s " in t h i s c o u n t r y
h i s t o r i c a l l y has been "a s p e c i a l c o n d i -
d i t i o n , which tends s e r i o u s l y t o c u r t a i l
t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h o s e p o l i t i c a l p r o
c e s s e s o r d i n a r i l y t o be r e l i e d upon t o
p r o t e c t m i n o r i t i e s . . . . " U n i te d S t a t e s
v . C a r o l e n e P r o d u c t s C o . , 304 U .S . 144,
152 n .4 ( 1 9 3 8 ) . B ecau se th e C la u s e was
des igned as an a n t id o t e to the " p o s i t i o n
o f p o l i t i c a l p o w e r l e s s n e s s . . . [ i n ] th e
m a j o r i t a r ia n p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s " to which
b l a c k s and o t h e r r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s have
b e e n r e l e g a t e d i n t h i s c o u n t r y , 53an
A n t o n i o S c h o o l D i s t . v . R o d r i q u e z , 411
1/CJ.S. 1 , 28 ( 1 973 ) , i t s p r o h i b i t o r y f o r c e
f a l l s h e a v i l y , perhaps most h e a v i l y , on
" laws which d e f in e the s t r u c t u r e o f p o l i
t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s " s o as t o c l a s s i f y
r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s l e s s advantageously than
a l l o t h e r c i t i z e n s . Hunter v . E r i c k s o n ,
393 U.S. 385, 393 (1969) (Harlan, J . , con
c u r r i n g ) ; see Mobile v . B o ld e n , 446 U.S.
55 , 8 3 -8 4 (1 9 80 ) ( S t e v e n s , J . , c o n c u r
r i n g ) ; s e e e . g . , White v . R e g e s t e r , 412
U .S . 755 ( 1 9 7 3 ) ; Nixon v . H e r n d o n , 273
U.S. 536 (1927 ) .
J_/ See Fo ley v , C o n n e l i e , 435 U.S. 291,
294 (1 9 78 ) ; Massachusetts Board o f R e t i r e -
ment v . Murgia, 427 U.S. 307, 313 ( 1 976) ;
In re G r i f f i t h s , 413 U.S. 717, 721 (1 973) ;
Takahashi v . Fish and Game Comm'n, 334 U.S.
410, 420 (1948 ) .
12
A. R a c ia l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n s D i s t o r t i n g
the P o l i t i c a l Process
Forbidden r a c i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s im
p in g in g on the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s in c l u d e ,
f o r example, the simple d e n ia l t o b la ck s
and o th e r r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s o f the f r a n
c h i s e a v a i l a b l e t o a l l o t h e r c i t i z e n s . C f .
Dunn v . B l u m s t e i n , 405 U .S . 330 ( 1 9 7 2 ) ;
Harper v . V i r g i n i a Board o f E l e c t o r s , 383
2/U.S. 663 (1966 ) .
S i m i l a r l y r i t i s fu n d a m e n ta l t o th e
Equal P r o t e c t i o n C la u s e t h a t th e S t a t e s
may not un favorab ly s i n g l e out b la ck s o r
o t h e r m i n o r i t i e s in th e p o l i t i c a l arena
by weight ing t h e i r v o te s l e s s h e a v i l y than
2 / Such a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s no l e s s
o b n o x i o u s t o t h e F o u r t e e n t h Amendment
b e c a u s e i t d i s a d v a n t a g e s o n l y ' some mem
bers o f a r a c i a l m in o r i ty - - f o r example,
by d e p r iv in g o n ly b la ck s who wish t o vo te
in th e D e m o c r a t i c P a r t y p r im a r y o f th e
a b i l i t y t o do so . E. g , White v . R e g e s t e r ,
s u p r a ; Nixon v . Herndon, s u p r a .
13
t h e v o t e s o f a l l o t h e r p e r s o n s — f o r
e x a m p l e , by a f f o r d i n g b l a c k s o n l y o n e
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e f o r every 10,000 c i t i z e n s ,
whi le a f f o r d i n g o th e rs one r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
f o r e v e r y 5 ,0 0 0 c i t i z e n s . Cf_. A very v .
3 /
Mid land C o u n t y , 390 U.S . 474 ( 1 9 6 8 ) . “
F i n a l l y , even where b la ck s and o t h e r
m i n o r i t i e s are al lowed the f r a n c h i s e and
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n e q u a l t o t h a t a f f o r d e d
o t h e r c i t i z e n s , t h i s Court has re co gn iz e d
t h a t t h e S t a t e s o f f e n d t h e F o u r t e e n t h
Amendment 's fu n d a m en ta l r e q u i r e m e n t o f
p o l i t i c a l n e u t r a l i t y among the races when
t h e y p a ss " s t a t u t e s which s t r u c t u r e the
i n t e r n a l g o v e r n m e n t a l p r o c e s s " s o as t o
"make[] i t more d i f f i c u l t f o r r a c i a l and
r e l i g i o u s m i n o r i t i e s [than f o r the r e s t o f
3 / Again, such a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n v i o l a t e s
the Fourteenth Amendment even i f i t does
n o t v i c t i m i z e a l l b l a c k s but o n l y , f o r
e x a m p le , b l a c k s l i v i n q in urban a r e a s .
C f . Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964 ) .
14 -
the c i t i z e n r y ] t o fu r t h e r t h e i r p o l i t i c a l
a im s . " Hunter v. E r i c k s o n , s u p r a , 393 U.S.
at 393 (Harlan, J. , c o n c u r r in g ) (emphasis
added) . For m in o r i ty c i t i z e n s are no l e s s
p o l i t i c a l l y pow er less with the vo te than
without i t i f the S ta te has arranged the
i n t e r n a l mechanics o f government so that
l e g i t i m a t e s t a t e a c t i o n b e n e f i t i n g r a c i a l
m i n o r i t i e s i s s t r u c t u r a l l y more d i f f i c u l t
t o a c h i e v e than s t a t e a c t i o n b e n e f i t i n g
o t h e r c o n s t i t u e n c i e s . See Mobile v. B o l
den , s u p r a , 446 U.S. at 83-84 (S te v e n s , J . ,
c o n c u r r i n g ) .
In t h i s l i g h t , f o r e x a m p le , a s t a t e
law r e q u i r i n q a t w o - t h i r d s m a j o r i t y f o r
l e g i s l a t i o n b e n e f i t i n g b l a c k s , where a
s i m p l e m a j o r i t y s u f f i c e s f o r a l l o t h e r
l e g i s l a t i o n , would c l e a r l y f a l l a f o u l o f
the Fourteenth Amendment. So, t o o , would
a s t a t e law s i n g l i n g out o n ly some b l a c k s ,
o r some s u b s t a n t iv e area o f governmental
15
b e n e f i t o f p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t t o some
b l a c k s , f o r d isadvantageous treatment in
the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . Such was the h o ld
ing o f Hunter v. E r i c k s o n , s u p r a .
B. Hunter v. Erickson
In Hunter th e m u n i c i p a l lawmaking
p r o c e s s in Akron , Ohio had in th e p a s t
been s t ru c tu re d so that the C i ty Counci l
c o u l d a d o p t any m u n i c i p a l o r d i n a n c e r e
l a t i n g t o a l e g i t i m a t e g o a l o f l o c a l
government — i n c l u d i n g , f o r example, the
r e g u l a t i o n o f r e a l - p r o p e r t y t r a n s a c t i o n s
— by a m a j o r i t y v o t e , s u b j e c t t o a c i t i
z e n s ' v e t o i f ( i ) 10 p ercen t o f the e l e c
t o r a t e s i g n e d a p e t i t i o n c a l l i n g f o r a
r e f e re n d u m on the o r d i n a n c e , and ( i i ) a
m a j o r i t y o f the C i t y ' s e l e c t o r a t e t h e r e
a f t e r d i s a p p r o v e d t h e o r d i n a n c e i n a
g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n . See 393 U .S . a t 387;
i d . a t 3 9 3 -9 4 (H a r l a n , J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) .
1 6
H_u nj: e r i n v o l v e d a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
c h a l l e n g e t o a c i t y - c h a r t e r amendment,
l e g i s l a t e d by referendum, that p a r t i a l l y
r e a r r a n g e d t h i s s t r u c t u r e . U n d er t h e
amendment, " [ a ] n y o r d i n a n c e which r e g u
l a t e [d] th e u s e , s a l e [ o r ] l e a s e . . . o f
r e a l p r o p e r t y o f any kind . . . on the b a s i s
o f r a c e , c o l o r , r e l i g i o n , n a t i o n a l o r i g i n
o r a n c e s t r y " n ot o n l y had t o s e c u r e th e
v o te s o f a m a jo r i t y o f the C i t y C o u n c i l ,
but a l s o had t o "be approved by a m a j o r i t y
o f the e l e c t o r s v o t i n g on the q u e s t i o n at
a r e g u la r or gen era l e l e c t i o n . . . . " Ic3. at
387 . A l l o t h e r m u n i c i p a l laws - - i . e . ,
o r d i n a n c e s n o t r e g u l a t i n g t h e s a l e o r
l e a s e o f r e a l p r o p e r t y , and t h o s e r e g u
l a t i n g the s a l e o r l e a s e o f r e a l p r o p e r t y
on some b a s i s o t h e r than race - - remained
s u b j e c t to the p r e e x i s t i n g , l e s s onerous
l e g i s l a t i v e p r o c e s s .
1 7
The C o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e c h a r t e r
amendment v i o l a t e d the Fourteenth Amend
ment. In so d o in g , both J u s t i c e White f o r
th e C ou r t and J u s t i c e Har lan in c o n c u r
rence noted that the c h a r t e r amendment ( i )
was d e s i g n e d t o r e s c i n d a f a i r - h o u s i n g
o r d i n a n c e p a s s e d by th e C i t y C o u n c i l in
o r d e r t o r e l i e v e r a c i a l and r e l i g i o u s
m i n o r i t i e s o f housing d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , and
( i i ) served to make the passage o f muni
c i p a l l e g i s l a t i o n by the C i t y C ounc i l more
d i f f i c u l t in the f u t u r e by p l a c i n g more
power d i r e c t l y in the hands o f the e l e c
t o r a t e , and l e s s in the hands o f the c i t y
government. But, as J u s t i c e H ar lan 's con
c u r r e n c e makes e x p l i c i t , i t was n e i t h e r
o f t h e s e f a c t s a l o n e t h a t r e n d e r e d th e
4 /
amendment u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . - Rather , the
4 / In the f i r s t p l a c e , that b la ck s and
r e l i g i o u s m i n o r i t i e s had u t i l i z e d t h e
18
law was u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l becau se , by way
_4/ cont inued
p r e - e x i s t i n g p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s to b e n e f i t
t h e m s e l v e s by e x t e n d i n g t h e i r s t a t u t o r y
c i v i l r i g h t s beyond what f e d e r a l law r e
q u i r e d d id n o t r e n d e r u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
the subsequent r e s c i s s i o n o f that a c t i o n
t h r o u g h e x e r c i s e o f t h e same g e n e r a l
p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s :
S t a t u t e s . . . which a r e g rou n d ed
upon g e n e r a l d e m o c r a t i c p r i n
c i p l e , do n o t v i o l a t e th e Equal
P r o t e c t i o n Clause simply because
t h e y o c c a s i o n a l l y o p e r a t e t o
d i s a d v a n t a g e N e g r o p o l i t i c a l
i n t e r e s t s . I f a g o v e r n m e n t a l
i n s t i t u t i o n i s t o be f a i r , one
g r o u p c a n n o t a lw ays be e x p e c t e d
t o w i n . I f t h e [ A k r o n C i t y ]
C o u n c i l ' s f a i r h o u s i n g l e g i s
l a t i o n were d e fe a te d at a r e f e r
endum, Negroes would undoubtedly
l o s e an i m p o r t a n t p o l i t i c a l
b a t t l e , but they would not thereby
b e d e n i e d e q u a l p r o t e c t i o n .
Hunter v . E r i c k s o n , s u p r a , 393 U.S. at 394
(Harlan, J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) . A cco rd , i d . at
390 n .5 ( m a j o r i t y o p i n i o n ) . See Dayton
Board o f Education v. Brinkman, 4 33 U.S.
406 , 4 1 3 -1 4 (1 9 7 7 ) ( s c h o o l b o a r d ' s r e s
c i s s i o n o f a p r i o r b o a r d ' s r e s o l u t i o n
19
o f a nonneutral s u b j e c t - m a t t e r c l a s s i f i c a
t i o n , i t r e q u i r e d m i n o r i t i e s s e e k i n g
l e g i s l a t i v e p r o t e c t i o n from housing d i s
c r i m i n a t i o n t o s u r m o u n t a r e f e r e n d u m
hurd le that s tood in the way o f no o th e r
4 / cont inued
i n i t i a t i n g a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n to undo de
f.£ c t_ o s e g r e g a t i o n d o e s n o t by i t s e F f
v i o l a t e the Fourteenth Amendment).
S i m i l a r l y , w e re a s t a t e o r l o c a l
g o v e r n m e n t t o o r g a n i z e i t s e l f s o t h a t
l e g i s l a t i o n , o r even some r a c i a l l y n eu tra l
s p e c i e s o f l e g i s l a t i o n — say that regu
l a t i n g a l l r e a l e s t a t e t r a n s a c t i o n s — i s
always d i f f i c u l t to p ass , such a govern
m en ta l s t r u c t u r e would not n e c e s s a r i l y
v i o l a t e the C o n s t i t u t i o n even though i t
might have the e f f e c t o f hampering e f f o r t s
by b la ck s t o pass f a i r - h o u s i n g l e g i s l a t i o n .
Such a r u le
o b v i o u s l y d o e s n o t h a v e t h e
p u r p o s e o f p r o t e c t i n g one p a r
t i c u l a r g r o u p t o t h e d e t r i
ment o f a l l o t h e r s . I t w i l l
s o m e t i m e s o p e r a t e in f a v o r o f
one f a c t i o n , sometimes in fa v o r o f
another .
Hunter v. E r i c k s o n , 393 U.S. at 394 (Harlan
J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) .
- 20
g e n e r a l , o r even h o u s i n g - r e l a t e d , l e g i s -
5 /
l a t i o n .
5 / N ota b ly , the Akron law s t ru ck down in
Hunter was f a c i a l l y n e u t r a l , s i n c e i t sub
j e c t e d ord in a n ces r e g u l a t i n g r e a l e s t a t e
t r a n s a c t i o n s "on the b a s i s o f r a c e " t o the
same b e f o r e - t h e - f a c t referendum r e q u i r e
ment w h e t h e r t h e y b e n e f i t e d w h i t e s o r
b l a c k s . The C o u r t c o n c l u d e d , h o w e v e r ,
t h a t th e l a w ' s f a c i a l n e u t r a l i t y was a
t r a n s p a r e n t d i s g u i s e f o r a n o n n e u t r a l
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n drawn p u r e l y and c l e a r l y
a long r a c i a l l i n e s :
[ A j l t h o u g h th e law on i t s f a c e
t r e a t s Negro and w h ite , Jew and
g e n t i l e in an i d e n t i c a l manner,
th e r e a l i t y i s t h a t th e l a w ' s
im pact f a l l s on the m i n o r i t y .
The m a j o r i t y needs no p r o t e c t i o n
a g a i n s t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and i f
i t d i d , a re f e re n d u m m ight be
b o t h e r s o m e b u t no m ore t h a n
t h a t . L i k e t h e law r e q u i r i n g
s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f c a n d i d a t e s '
ra ce on the b a l l o t , Anderson v.
M a r t i n , 375 U . S . 399 ( 1 9 6 4 ) ,
[ t h e Akron c h a r t e r amendment]
p l a c e s s p e c i a l burdens on r a c i a l
m i n o r i t i e s w i t h i n th e g o v e r n
mental p r o c e s s . This i s no more
p e r m i s s i b l e than d e n y in g them
the vo te on an equal b a s i s with
o t h e r s . The p r e a m b l e t o t h e
open h o u s in g l e g i s l a t i o n which
was su spen ded by [ t h e c h a r t e r
amendment] . . . r e c i t e d t h a t
the p o p u la t i o n o f Akron c o n s i s t s
21
Because " the c i t y o f Akron ha[d] not
attempted t o a l l o c a t e governmental power
5 / cont inued
o f " p e o p l e o f d i f f e r e n t r a c e ,
c o l o r , r e l i g i o n , a n c e s t r y o r
n a t i o n a l o r i g i n , many o f whom
l i v e in c i r cu m scr ib ed and s e g r e
gated a re a s , under substandard,
u n h e a l t h fu l , unsa fe , unsanitary
and o v e r c r o w d e d c o n d i t i o n s ,
because o f d i s c r i m i n a t i o n in the
s a l e , l e a s e , r e n t a l and f i n a n
c i n g o f h o u s i n g . " Such was
the^ s i t u a t i o n in Akron . I t i s
a g a in s t t h i s background that the
r e f e r e n d u m r e q u i r e d by [ t h e
c h a r t e r amendment] . . . must be
a s s e s s e d .
Hunter v. E r i c kson, supra, 393 U.S. at 391
( c i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d ) .
S i n c e the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n c o v e r t l y
drawn by the law was based upon race (as
w e l l as e t h n i c i t y and r e l i g i o n ) a l o n e , and
was not j u s t i f i e d by a com p e l l in g n e c e s
s i t y , the Court concluded that i t v i o l a t e d
the Equal P r o t e c t i o n Clause without r e f e r
ence to the Akron e l e c t o r a t e ' s m o t iv a t io n
f o r drawing i t . Id . at 389 ("we need not
r e s t on [ t h e C o u r t ' s i n v i d i o u s - p u r p o s e
ca ses ] t o d e c id e t h i s ca se . Here, u n l ike
[ in those c a s e s ] , there was an e x p l i c i t l y
r a c i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n t r e a t i n g r a c i a l
h o u s i n g m a t t e r s d i f f e r e n t f r o m o t h e r
r a c i a l and housing m a t t e r s " ) ; i d . at 395
(H a r l a n , J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) . As ~ th e C ourt
22
on th e b a s i s o f any g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e , "
Hunter v . E r i c k s o n , s u p r a , 393 U.S. at 394
( H a r l a n , J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) , o r t o p r o v i d e
"a p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e t h a t t r e a t s a l l
i n d i v i d u a l s as e q u a l s , " Mobile v . B o ld e n ,
s u p r a , 446 U.S. at 84 (S te v e n s , J . , c on
c u r r i n g ) , but ins tead passed "a p r o v i s i o n
that ha[d] the c l e a r purpose o f making i t
m ore d i f f i c u l t f o r c e r t a i n r a c i a l and
r e l i g i o u s m i n o r i t i e s t o a ch ieve l e g i s l a
t i o n t h a t i s i n t h e i r i n t e r e s t , " t h e
c h a r t e r amendment v i o l a t e d the Fourteenth
Amendment in the absence o f a com p e l l in g
j u s t i f i c a t i o n . Hunter v . E r i c k s o n , 393
U . S . a t 394 ( H a r l a n , J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) .
5 / cont inued
su bsequ en t ly r e i t e r a t e d in Personnel Ad
m i n i s t r a t o r v . F e e n e y , 442 U .S . 2 5 6 , 274
( 1 9 7 9 ) , i t i s on ly " [ i j f the c l a s s i f i c a
t i o n i t s e l f , c o v e r t o r o v e r t , i s not based
upon [ r a c e ] " t h a t th e c o u r t s must r e a ch
" t h e s e c o n d q u e s t i o n . . . w h e t h e r t h e
adverse E f f e c t r e f l e c t s in v i d i o u s [ r a c e - ]
b ased d i s c r i m i n a t i o n " (em p h a s is a d d e d ) .
23
Hunter e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t , whi le mem
bers o f the p o l i t i c a l m a jo r i t y are f r e e
t o ( i ) u t i l i z e g o v e r n m e n t a l p r o c e s s e s
org an ized a long a "ge n e ra l p r i n c i p l e " t o
r e s c i n d s t a t e a c t i o n b e n e f i t i n g r a c i a l
• v 1/m i n o r i t i e s , and ( 1 1 ) t o s u b j e c t them
s e l v e s and a l l o t h e r s , in c lu d in g r a c i a l
6 / Of c o u r s e , the i n v i d i o u s l y motivated
r e s c i s s i o n o f a p r i o r b e n e f i t t o minor
i t i e s does v i o l a t e the C o n s t i t u t i o n . Such
i s the case o f P r o p o s i t i o n 1 in C a l i f o r n i a .
S e e C r a wf o r d v . Board o f E d u c a t i o n o f
t h e C i t y o f Los A n g e l e s , No. 8 1 - 3 8 .
S i m i l a r l y , s t a t e and l o c a l g o v e r n
ments g u i l t y o f p r i o r r a c i a l d i s c r i m i n a
t i o n have a c o n t in u in g a f f i r m a t i v e duty t o
remedy i t s consequences and a c c o r d i n g l y
are not c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y f r e e to withdraw
r i g h t s o r b e n e f i t s s e rv in g that remedial
purpose . E . g . , Columbus Board o f Educa
t i o n v . P e n icF , 443 U.S. 449, 459 (1979 ) ;
Wright v . Counci l o f the C i ty o f Emporia,
4 07 U.S. 451 ( 1 972) . In advance o f Phase
I I o f the presen t l i t i g a t i o n , we assume
f o r purposes o f argument that n e i t h e r the
S ta te o f Washington, nor any o f the o t h e r
munic ipa l governments in v o lv e d , i s g u i l t y
o f p r i o r r a c i a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n .
N o t a b l y , a f i n d i n g t h a t I n i t i a t i v e
350 i s u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l would p r o b a b l y
r e m o v e any h e e d F o r P h a s e I I , s i n c e
24
m i n o r i t i e s , t o an a r d u o u s p r o c e s s o f
s e c u r in g l e g i s l a t i o n o r o t h e r governmental
a c t i o n b e n e f i c i a l t o th em se lves , in c l u d i n g
by r e a rra n g in g governmental power so that
more o f i t r e s i d e s at one l e v e l ( e . g . ,
with the e l e c t o r a t e ) and l e s s at another
( e . g . , with l o c a l governmental o f f i c i a l s ) ,
members o f the m a j o r i t y may not pass a law
d e p r i v i n g r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s o f the bene
f i t s o f the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s by s u b j e c t
i n g m i n o r i t i e s , b u t n o t t h e m s e l v e s ,
t o s t r u c t u r a l o r o t h e r p o l i t i c a l d i s
a b i l i t i e s . Such a law i s not "grounded in
6 / cont inued
S e a t t l e ' s v o l u n t a r i l y adopted d e se g re g a
t i o n p lan moots any need f o r c o u r t - o r d e r e d
measures. On the o t h e r hand, under Penick
and W r ig h t , s u p r a , I n i t i a t i v e 350 cannot
f i n a l l y be adjudged c o n s t i t u t i o n a l u n t i l
a f t e r Phase I I determines whether ( i ) the
S ta te o f Washington o r S e a t t l e i s under a
c o n t in u in g duty t o d e se g re g a te the s c h o o l s
o f S e a t t l e , and ( i i ) whether the I n i t i a
t i v e i n t e r f e r e s with that duty . See North
C a ro l in a Sta te Board o f Education v . Swann,
402 U.S. 43 (1971 ) .
25
in n e u tra l p r i n c i p l e . " Hunter v. E r i c k s o n ,
393 U.S. at 395 (Harlan, J. , c o n c u r r i n g ) .
By d i v i d i n g the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s a long
r a c i a l l i n e s , i t cements i n t o th e p o
l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f the S ta te the same
" s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n " — i . e . , a " p r e j u d i c e
a g a in s t d i s c r e t e and in s u la r m i n o r i t i e s
. . . which tends t o c u r t a i l the o p e r a t i o n
o f the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s o r d i n a r i l y t o be
r e l i e d upon t o p r o t e c t m i n o r i t i e s , " United
S t a t e s v . C a r o l e n e P roducts Co. , s u p r a ,
304 U .S . a t 152 n .4 — whose e x i s t e n c e
j u s t i f i e s t h e F o u r t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t ' s
" e x t r a o r d i n a r y p r o t e c t i o n " o f b la ck s and
o t h e r m i n o r i t i e s " from the m a j o r i t a r ia n
p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . " San Antonio School
D i s t . v . R o d r i q u e z , s u p r a , 411 U .S . a t
28.
The requirement that s t a t e p o l i t i c a l
p r o c e s s e s be r a c i a l l y n e u t r a l i s no
Fourteenth Amendment f e l l o w t r a v e l e r . I t
26
i s c o m p e l l e d by th e same " b a s i c p r i n
c i p l e s , " Hunter v. E r i c k s o n , 393 U.S. at
396 (Harlan, J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) , l y i n g at the
" c o r e o f the Fourteenth Amendment," ic3. at
391 ( m a j o r i t y o p i n i o n ) , th a t demand that
r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s be a f f o r d e d t h e same
r i g h t t o v o t e , and t h e same l e v e l o f
p o l i t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , as a l l o t h e r
c i t i z e n s . S e e G. GUNTHER, CASES AND
MATERIALS ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 691-707
(9th Ed. 1975). Whatever o t h e r g o a l s the
Equal P r o t e c t i o n C la u s e i s d e s i g n e d t o
a c h i e v e , at the very l e a s t i t demands " the
p r e v e n t i o n o f meaningful and u n j u s t i f i e d
o f f i c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n s based on r a c e , " and
p a r t i c u l a r l y those d i s t i n c t i o n s d isadvan
ta g in g r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s in the p o l i t i c a l
p r o c e s s . Hunter v. E r i ck s o n , s u p r a , 393
U.S at 391.
71
C. Nyquist v. Lee
In N y q u i s t v . L e e , 401 U. S . 935
(1 9 7 1 ) , a f f 'g 318 F. Supp. 710 (W.D. N.Y.
1970) , the Court re a f f i rm e d th ese p r i n
c i p l e s in a c o n t e x t in v o lv in g the uneven,
s u b j e c t - m a t t e r - s p e c i f i c r e a l i g n m e n t o f
p o l i t i c a l power - - n o t , as in H u n t e r ,
between l o c a l munic ipal o f f i c i a l s and the
e l e c t o r a t e , but between s t a t e and l o c a l
p u b l i c - s c h o o l o f f i c i a l s .
In New York (u n l ik e in most American
s t a t e s , see M i l l ik e n v. B r a d le y , 418 U.S.
717, 742 & n.20 ( 1 9 7 4 ) ) , a u t h o r i t y over
t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s l a r g e l y b e l o n g s t o
s t a t e , r a t h e r t h a n l o c a l , e d u c a t i o n
o f f i c i a l s . Thus, the Board o f Regents o f
the U n iv e r s i t y o f the State o f New York,
and i t s c h i e f e x e c u t i v e o f f i c e r , t h e
Commissioner o f Educat ion , have long had
" t h e a u t h o r i t y t o o r d e r l o c a l s c h o o l
b o a r d s t o a c t in a c c o r d a n c e w i th s t a t e
28
e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c i e s f o r m u l a t e d by th e
Board o f R e g e n ts . " Lee v . N y q u i s t , 318
F.Supp. at 719. As in Hunter, with regard
t o housing in Akron, the r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s
b e f o r e the Court in Lee had succeeded in
the past in co n v in c in g th ese o f f i c i a l s t o
adopt "a p o l i c y o f e r a d i c a t i n g de f a c t o
s e g r e g a t i o n " in the p u b l i c s c h o o l s o f New
7 /
York. 3!d̂ at 716. D esp i te " c o n s i d e r a b l e
l o c a l r e s i s t a n c e , " the Regents and Commis
s i o n e r o f Education e n fo r ce d t h i s p o l i c y
by o r d e r i n g l o c a l s c h o o l b o a r d s t o r e
a ss ig n s tudents to assure r a c i a l ba lance
in the s c h o o l s . Id .
7 / " [ S j c h o o l a u t h o r i t i e s have wide d i s
c r e t i o n in fo rm u la t in g s c h o o l p o l i c y , and
. . . as a matter o f e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c y . . .
may w e l l con c lu d e that some kind o f r a c i a l
ba lance in the s c h o o l s i s d e s i r a b l e q u i t e
a p a r t from any c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e q u i r e
m ents . " North C aro l in a Board o f Education
v . Swann, 402 U.S. 31, 45 (1 9 7 1 ) ; a c c o r d ,
Swann v . C h a r l o t t e - M e c k l e n b u r g Board o f
E ducat ion , 402 U.S. 1, 16 (1 9 71 ) .
29
The opponents o f mandatory d e s e g re g a
t i o n in New York secured l e g i s l a t i o n r e s
c in d in g such o r d e r s . As in Hunter, how
e v e r , t h i s goa l was not accomplished by
simply r e v e r s in g the same p o l i t i c a l p r o
c e s s that m i n o r i t i e s had p r e v i o u s l y used
t o secure s ta te - im posed a n t i - s e g r e g a t i v e
m e a s u r e s . N o r was i t a c c o m p l i s h e d by
g e n e r a l l y r e a r r a n g i n g t h e p o l i t i c a l
p r o c e s s t o make a c t i o n by s t a t e ed u ca t ion
o f f i c i a l s , in c lu d in g a c t i o n b e n e f i c i a l t o
the v i c t im s o f de f a c t o s e g r e g a t i o n , more
d i f f i c u l t t o a c h i e v e , f o r i n s t a n c e by
f o r c i n g s t a t e o f f i c i a l s g e n e r a l l y t o share
a u t h o r i t y with l o c a l ones .
In s te ad , as in Hunter, the opponents
o f s tate-mandated d e s e g r e g a t io n adopted a
s u b j e c t - m a t t e r - s p e c i f i c law p r o v id in g that
any a c t i o n regarding student assignment
" o n a c c o u n t o f r a c e , c r e e d , c o l o r o r
30
n a t i o n a l o r i g i n " would r e q u i r e , in a d d i
t i o n t o the approval o f s t a t e o f f i c i a l s ,
" the express approval o f a [ l o c a l ] board
o f e d u c a t i o n h a v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n , a
m a j o r i t y o f th e members o f such b o a r d
8 /
h a v i n g b e e n e l e c t e d . . . . " — Lee v .
8/ As in Hunter , the law s t r u c k down in
Lee on i t s f a c e was r a c i a l l y n e u t r a l ,
s i n c e r a c e - c o n s c i o u s r e a s s i g n m e n t o f
s tudents t o b e n e f i t whites was s u b je c t e d
t o the same s p e c i a l hurd les as r e a s s i g n
ment t o b e n e f i t b la c k s . However, as in
Hunter , see note 5, s u p r a , the Lee Court
r e c o g n i z e d , g iven the s t a t u t e ' s g e n e s i s in
" l o c a l r e s i s t a n c e " t o p a s t i n t e g r a t i v e
s tuden t -ass ign m en t p la n s , that the s t a t u t e
e f f e c t i v e l y embodied an " e x p l i c i t l y r a c i a l
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n " a f f o r d i n g the e d u c a t i o n a l
i n t e r e s t s o f the b lack v i c t im s o f de f a c t o
s e g r e g a t i o n l e s s fa v o r a b le treatment than
th e e d u c a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s o f a l l o t h e r
c i t i z e n s . Lee v . N y g u i s t , s u p r a , 318
F. Supp. at 718. As in Hunter, the law
was a c c o r d i n g l y h e ld u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
i r r e s p e c t i v e o f th e m o t i v a t i o n o f i t s
p ropon en ts . Id .
In view o f L e e , and the o t h e r cases
a p p l y i n g Hunter in s c h o o l - s e g r e g a t i o n
c o n t e x t s , e . g . , Evans v . B u ch an an , 393
F. Supp. 428 , 4 4 0 -4 1 ( D. D e l . ) ( 3 - j u d g e
c o u r t ) , a f f ' d , 423 U.S. 963 ( 1 9 7 5 ) ( c i t i n g
c a s e s ) , the Government 's s u g g e s t i o n that
31
N y q u i s t , s u p r a , 318 F.Supp. at 712. While
g i v i n g l o c a l o f f i c i a l s a u t h o r i t y over t h i s
8/ cont inued
t h e F o u r t e e n t h Amendment p r o h i b i t i o n
e n u n c i a t e d in Hunter i s l i m i t e d t o non
n e u t r a l l a w s d i s c o u r a g i n g e f f o r t s t o
end de f a c t o housing s e g r e g a t i o n , and does
not apply to nonneutral laws d i s c o u r a g in g
e f f o r t s t o end de f a c t o s c h o o l s e g r e g a
t i o n , i s l u d i c r o u s . E. g . , B r i e f o f the
U n i te d S t a t e s , a t 1 7 - 1 8 . See g e n e r a l l y
Columbus Board o f Education v. P e n i c k , 443
U .S . 449 , 465 n .1 3 ( 1 9 7 9 ) ( c i t i n g c a s e s )
( n o t i n g th e h a n d - i n - g l o v e r e l a t i o n s h i p
between housing and s ch o o l s e g r e g a t i o n ) .
Indeed, the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f e f f o r t s
t o end de f a c t o s c h o o l s e g r e g a t i o n on
which the Government r e l i e s to d i s t i n g u i s h
t h i s c a s e from Hunter — i . e . , t h a t some
m i n o r i t i e s may n o t be b e n e f i t e d by such
measures, B r i e f o f the United S t a t e s , at
17-18 - - a p p l i e s e q u a l l y in th e h o u s in g
c o n te x t in Hunter. However, that not a l l
m i n o r i t i e s s u p p o r t open h o u s in g o r i n
t e g r a t e d s c h o o l i n g does not undermine the
c o n c lu s i o n in Hunter, Lee and below that
a l e g i s l a t i v e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n b u r d e n in g
such s u p p o r t e r s , but no o th e r c i t i z e n s , i s
u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b e c a u s e t h o s e whom i t
does d isadvantage are m i n o r i t i e s . Other
w ise , f o r example, the C o u r t ' s c o n c lu s i o n
in Nixon v. Herndon, s u p r a , that a "white
Democratic primary" law u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y
d isadvantages b lacks would be undermined
by th e f a c t t h a t many b l a c k s are Repub
l i c a n s , and have no d e s i r e t o vo te in the
Democratic primary. See notes 2, 3, supra.
32
o n e a s p e c t o f e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c y — - -
o f s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t t o the r a c i a l m in o r i ty
v i c t i m s o f de f a c t o s e g r e g a t i o n —■ the law
l e f t the a u t h o r i t y o f s t a t e o f f i c i a l s in
t a c t as to a l l o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l m a tters ,
i n c l u d i n g a l l o t h e r s t u d e n t - a s s i g n m e n t
m a t t e r s .
As in Hunter, the Court in Lee found
t h i s la w u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l u n d e r t h e
Fourteenth Amendment because the s p e c i f i c
r e a r r a n g e m e n t o f th e p o l i t i c a l sys tem
c h o s e n t o a c c o m p l i s h th e p r e s e n t r e s
c i s s i o n and f u t u r e d i s c o u r a g e m e n t o f
9 / The law s t ru ck down in Lee a c t u a l l y
r e a l i g n e d a u t h o r i t y o v e r s tudent a s s i g n
ment t o a l l e v i a t e ale f a c t o s e g r e g a t i o n - in
two ways. In s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s governed by
an e l e c t e d s c h o o l board , f i n a l a u t h o r i t y
r e s t e d w i th t h a t b o a r d . In d i s t r i c t s
g o v e r n e d by an a p p o i n t e d s c h o o l b o a r d ,
however, the law withdrew the a u t h o r i t y t o
a s s ig n s tudents t o a l l e v i a t e s e g r e g a t i o n
from a l l ( i . e . , s t a t e and l o c a l ) e d u ca t io n
o f f i c i a l s , l e a v in g i t e x c l u s i v e l y in the
hands o f the s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e . See Lee v .
N y q u i s t , s u p r a , 318 F. S u p p . a t 7 1 9 .
33
c i v i l - r i g h t s - o r i e n t e d b e n e f i t s previously-
c o n fe r r e d on m i n o r i t i e s was not r a c i a l l y
n e u t r a l :
[The s t a t u t e ] s i n g l e s o u t f o r
d i f f e r e n t t r e a t m e n t a l l p l a n s
w h i c h h a v e as t h e i r p u r p o s e
th e a ss ig n m e n t o f s t u d e n t s in
o r d e r t o a l l e v i a t e r a c i a l im
b a l a n c e . The C o m m is s io n e r and
l o c a l a p p o i n t e d o f f i c i a l s [ s e e
n o t e 9 , s u p r a ] a re p r o h i b i t e d
f r o m a c t i n g m t h e s e m a t t e r s
o n l y where r a c i a l c r i t e r i a are
i n v o l v e d . The s t a t u t e t h u s
c r e a t e s a c l e a r l y r a c i a l c l a s s i
f i c a t i o n , t r e a t i n g e d u c a t i o n a l
matters in v o lv in g r a c i a l c r i t e r i a
d i f f e r e n t l y from o t h e r e d u c a
t i o n a l m a t t e r s and m a k in g i t
m ore d i f f i c u l t t o d e a l w i t h
r a c i a l im b a la n ce in th e p u b l i c
s c h o o l s . We can co n c e iv e o f no
more c o m p e l l i n g c a s e f o r t h e
a p p l i c a t i o n o f the Hunter p r i n
c i p l e .
318 F. Supp. at 719 (Hays, J. ) , a f f ' d , 401
U.S. 935 (1971 ) .
Lee, l i k e Hunter, l i e s at the " c o r e "
o f the Fourteenth Amendment's " p r o t e c t i o n
[ o f m i n o r i t i e s ] f r o m t h e m a j o r i t a r i a n
34
p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . " San Antonio Schoo l
D i s t . v . R o d r iq u e z , s u p r a , 411 U.S. at 28.
I t t o o s t r i k e s down an e f f o r t by members
o f the m a j o r i t y t o s t r u c t u r e the p o l i t i c a l
p r o c e s s s o t h a t t h e b l a c k v i c t i m s o f
s e g r e g a t i o n are once again r e l e g a t e d to
t h e h i s t o r i c a l p o s i t i o n o f " p o l i t i c a l
p o w e r le s s n e s s " v i s a v i s a l l o t h e r c i t i
zens th a t the Equal P r o t e c t i o n Clause was
p a r t i c u l a r l y d e s i g n e d t o rem edy . I d .
D. I n i t i a t i v e 350
I n i t i a t i v e 350 i s a m ir r o r image o f
the law found u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l in Nyquist
v . L e e . Like that law, I n i t i a t i v e 350 was
l e g i s l a t e d in d i r e c t response t o a plan
( i n t h i s c a s e "T h e S e a t t l e P l a n " ) o f
" m a n d a t o r y " s t u d e n t r e a s s i g n m e n t t o
a ch ie v e g r e a t e r i n t e r r a c i a l c o n t a c t in the
1 0 /
s c h o o l s , o n l y h e r e t h e n o n n e u t r a l
10/ "Mandatory" i s a misnomer. For the
c i t i z e n s o f S e a t t l e , through t h e i r e l e c t e d
35
real ignment o f power runs from the l o c a l
to the State l e v e l , ra th e r than from the
1 1/S t a t e t o th e l o c a l l e v e l , as in L e e .
In the S t a t e o f W a s h in g t o n , as in
most American j u r i s d i c t i o n s ( e x c e p t i n g
New Y o rk ) , see M i l l ik e n v. B r a d le y , s u p r a ,
418 U.S. at 742 & n. 20, the a u t h o r i t y to
10/ cont inued
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s on the s c h o o l board o f
t h a t d i s t r i c t , v o l u n t a r i l y c h o s e t o r e
a s s i g n s t u d e n t s i n o r d e r t o a c h i e v e a
g r e a t e r d e g r e e o f r a c i a l b a l a n c e . The
mandate, that i s , came not from a f e d e r a l
c o u r t o r o t h e r a g e n c y n o t d i r e c t l y r e s
p o n s i b l e to the c i t i z e n s o f S e a t t l e , but
from those c i t i z e n s themselves . The term
i s a ccu ra te on ly in the sense t h a t , as in
v i r t u a l l y e v e r y p u b l i c s c h o o l sys tem in
the cou n try , the student assignment plan
in S e a t t l e re q u ire s that s tudents l i v i n g
i n s p e c i f i e d a r e a s a t t e n d s p e c i f i e d
s c h o o l s , ra th e r than a l low in g each student
v o l u n t a r i l y t o c h o o s e th e s c h o o l he o r
she a t te n d s .
11 / The law in Lee r e a l ig n e d the p o l i t i
c a l p r o c e s s in some d i s t r i c t s in New York
by removing a u t h o r i t y from e d u ca t io n o f f i
c i a l s g e n e r a l l y and g iv in g i t to the Sta te
l e g i s l a t u r e . See note 9, s u p r a . To t h i s
e x t e n t , I n i t i a t i v e 350 i s an e x a c t , ra th er
than m ir r o r , image o f the law s t ru ck down
in Lee.
36
o p e r a t e the p u b l i c s c h o o l s and, s p e c i f i c
a l l y , t o a s s i g n s t u d e n t s t o p a r t i c u l a r
f a c i l i t i e s , r e s i d e s a lm o s t e x c l u s i v e l y
in l o c a l s c h o o l b o a r d s . "The law [ o f
Washington] has p l a i n l y ves ted the board
o f d i r e c t o r s o f s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s such as
t h i s w i th d i s c r e t i o n a r y powers in such
m a t t e r s . " S ta te ex r e l , Lukens v . Spokane
S c h o o l D i s t r i c t 81 , 147 Wash. 4 6 7 ,
474, 266 P. 189, 191 (1 9 2 8 ) . See S e a t t l e
Schoo l D i s t . No. 1 v. Washington, 473 F.
Supp. 996, 1010 (W.D. Wash. 1979) (F inding
o f F a c t 8 . 2 ) . As t h e Supreme C ou r t o f
Washington has e x p r e s s l y h e l d , the S e a t t l e
s c h o o l board was f r e e t o adopt a mandatory
i n t e g r a t i o n program such as The S e a t t l e
Plan in the proper e x e r c i s e o f i t s broad
d i s c r e t i o n a r y power over s tudent a s s i g n
ment . See C i t i z e n s A g a i n s t Mandatory
B u s s in g v . P a lm a s o n , 495 P .2d 6 5 7 , 666
37
12/
(Wash. 1 9 7 2 ) .—
Although the S e a t t l e Plan encountered
o p p o s i t i o n , i t s o p p o n e n t s d id n o t seek
t o r e s c in d the Plan through the p r e - e x i s t
ing p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s . In s te a d , they found
i t e a s i e r t o rearrange that p r o c e s s through
13/
adopt ion o f I n i t i a t i v e 350. 473 p. supp.
at 1006-07 (Findings o f Fact 6 . 3 , 7 . 1 - 7 . 5 ) .
12/ In P a lm a s o n , th e Supreme C ourt o f
Washington h e ld , p r i o r to the enactment o f
I n i t i a t i v e 350, that l o c a l s c h o o l boards
in Washington have almost p len a ry " d i s c r e
t i o n a r y power" o v e r s t u d e n t a s s ig n m e n t s
w i t h i n t h e i r d i s t r i c t s , s u b j e c t o n l y t o
j u d i c i a l review to determine i f such as
signments " v i o l a t e some fundamental r i g h t
o f the party c h a l l e n g in g them." 495 P.2d
at 660 & n n . 3 , 4. The C ou rt c o n c l u d e d
that a p r e d e c e s s o r o f "The S e a t t l e Plan"
v i o l a t e d no such r i g h t . I_d. a t 6 6 2 - 6 3 .
13/ P r e v i o u s a t t e m p t s by o p p o n e n t s o f
d e s e g r e g a t i o n t o r e c a l l the p r o - i n t e g r a t i o n
members o f t h e S e a t t l e s c h o o l b o a r d
had f a i l e d . 473 F. Supp. at 1006 (F inding
o f Fact 6 . 3 ) , a f f ' d , 633 F.2d 1338, 1346
(9th C i r . 1980).
38 -
As in Hunter and L e e , however, the Wash
in g ton v o t e r s who adopted the I n i t i a t i v e
d i d n o t g e n e r a l l y r e s t r u c t u r e th e p o l i
t i c a l p r o c e s s s o t h a t a_l__l c o m p a r a b l e
g o v e r n m e n t a l a c t i o n would be h a r d e r t o
s e c u r e in th e f u t u r e . R a t h e r , u s i n g a
s u b j e c t - m a t t e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n l i k e those
s t ru ck down in Hunter and L e e , I n i t i a t i v e
350 re s c in d e d The S e a t t l e Plan and p reven
ted i t s d u p l i c a t i o n in the fu t u r e by non-
n e u t r a l l y r e a l i g n i n g the p o l i t i c a l s t r u c
t u r e o f p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n in W ash in gton
a long l i n e s co r resp on d in g t o the race o f
the persons a d v e r s e ly a f f e c t e d . Under the
I n i t i a t i v e , th e m i n o r i t y v i c t i m s o f de
f a c t o s c h o o l s e g r e g a t i o n cou ld o n ly secure
governmental a c t i o n r e l i e v i n g that c o n d i
t i o n from t h e S t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e o r th e
S t a t e e l e c t o r a t e a t l a r g e , a l t h o u g h a l l
o t h e r c i t i z e n s remained f r e e t o a c h i e v e
any o t h e r g o a l o f p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n o r
s tudent assignment through l o c a l s c h o o l
b o a r d s .
The r a c i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n drawn by
I n i t i a t i v e 350 i s c l e a r from the f a c e o f
that p r o v i s i o n . Under the I n i t i a t i v e , the
c i t i z e n s o f W ash ington remain f r e e , as
b e f o r e i t was a d o p t e d , t o s e c u r e from
l o c a l s c h o o l boards : ( i ) any governmental
a c t i o n a f f e c t i n g p u b l i c ed u ca t ion o t h e r
than student assignment ( I n i t i a t i v e 350,
§ 1 ) , and any s tudent -ass ignment a c t i o n
d e s i g n e d t o ( i i ) u t i l i z e " t h e s c h o o l
n e a re s t o r next neares t t o s t u d e n t ' s p l a c e
o f r e s i d e n c e " ( ic3. ) , o r , r e g a r d l e s s o f the
l o c a t i o n o f the s c h o o l f a c i l i t y , t o ( i i i )
improve " the course o f s tudy" a v a i l a b l e to
s t u d e n t s ( i (3. ) , ( i v ) p r o v i d e " s p e c i a l
e d u c a t i o n , care o r g u id a n c e , " in c lu d in g
f o r " s tu den ts who are p h y s i c a l l y , m enta l ly
40
o r e m o t i o n a l ly handicapped" (Ld. §§ 1 ( 1 ) ,
( 4 ) ) , (v ) a l l e v i a t e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n d i f f i
c u l t i e s , c a u s e d by " h e a l t h o r s a f e t y
h azard s , e i t h e r na tura l o r man-made, o r
p h y s i c a l b a r r i e r s o r o b s t a c l e s , e i t h e r
n a tu ra l o r man-made" ( i d . § 1 ( 2 ) ) , ( v i )
avo id a ttendance at f a c i l i t i e s that are
" u n f i t o r i n a d e q u a t e b e c a u s e o f o v e r
c r o w d i n g , u n s a f e c o n d i t i o n s o r l a c k o f
p h y s i c a l f a c i l i t i e s " (_id. § 1 ( 3 ) ) , o r
( v i i ) s a t i s f y "most, i f not a l l , o f the
major reasons f o r which s tudents are at
p r e s e n t ass igned t o s c h o o l s o t h e r than the
n e a re s t o r next n eares t s c h o o l s " e x c e p t
f o r d e s e g r e g a t i o n (453 F. Supp. at 1010,
1 4 /
Finding o f Fact 8 . 3 ) . As i t s p ro p o
nents promised the v o t e r s o f Washington,
14/ I n i t i a t i v e 350 i s not a n e ig h borh ood -
s c h o o l law. I t l e a v e i i n t a c t the l o c a l
s c h o o l b o a r d ' s broad d i s c r e t i o n t o d e f i n e
the c u r r i c u l u r , r e m e d ia l , h e a l t h , s a f e t y ,
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and s p a c e n eeds o f i t s
41
I n i t i a t i v e 350 o c c a s i o n s " n o l o s s o f
[ l o c a l ] s c h o o l d i s t r i c t f l e x i b i l i t y o t h e r
than in b u s i n g f o r d e s e g r e g a t i o n p u r
p o se s " (473 F. Supp. at 1008, Finding o f
Fact 7 . 1 8 ) , and in no way a f f e c t s the "99%
o f th e s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s " i n W ash ington
( i , e . , a l l but the three respondent d i s
t r i c t s ) t h a t are not now a s s i g n i n g o r
contem plat ing the assignment o f s tudents
14/ cont inued
s t u d e n t s , and t o a ss ign those s tudents to
s c h o o l s o th e r than those neares t o r next
n ea res t t h e i r p la c e o f r e s i d e n c e , i f i t
con c lu d es that any o f those needs w i l l be
b e t t e r served by such ass ignments . A c c o r
d i n g l y , even were a n e ig h b o r h o o d -s c h o o l
p o l i c y com p e l l in g enough t o j u s t i f y what
o t h e r w i s e amounts t o a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
v i o l a t i o n — but see Swann v . C h a r l o t t e -
Mecklenburg Board o f E d u ca t ion , 402 U.S 1,
28 (1971) — I n i t i a t i v e 350 i s des igned t o
a c h i e v e no such p o l i c y , s i n c e as b o th
c o u r t s below expi?essly found, i t f r e e l y
a l l o w s l o c a l s c h o o l boards t o ignore that
g o a l whenever any e d u c a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t
o t h e r than r a c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n i s in v o lv e d .
453 F. Supp. a t 1010 ( F i n d i n g o f F a c t
8 . 3 ) , a f f ' d , 633 F . 3 d a t 1344 & n . 4 .
42
t o encourage i n t e r r a c i a l c o n t a c t (i<3. at
1008-09, Finding o f Fact 7 . 9 ) .
A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e s i n g l e c l a s s s u b
j e c t e d by I n i t i a t i v e 350 t o th e e x t r a
o r d i n a r y p o l i t i c a l burden o f h a v in g t o
o b t a i n s ta te w id e l e g i s l a t i v e o r popu lar
approva l o f l o c a l s tudent -ass ignm ent p r o
p o s a l s s u i t i n g i t s p a r t i c u l a r n eed s i s
composed e x c l u s i v e l y o f " th e b la ck s t u
d e n t s " in th e S t a t e o f W a s h in g to n who
a r e v i c t i m i z e d b y s e g r e g a t i o n i n t h e
p u b l i c s c h o o l s . Id . at 1007 (F inding o f
15/Fact 6 . 1 2 ) , a f f ' d , 633 F.2d at 1342 -44 .—
S i n c e , as in Hunter and Lee the d i s a d v a n -
15/ The C o u r t s b e l o w b o t h found t h a t
b la ck c i t i z e n s l i v i n g in segreg atd n e ig h
borhoods in Washington b e l i e v e th a t r a c i a l
i n t e g r a t i o n o f the s c h o o l s would b e n e f i t
t h e i r c h i l d r e n . R e g a r d l e s s o f w h e th e r
t h o s e c i t i z e n s a re r i g h t o r wrong ( s e e
S e c t i o n I I , i n f r a ) , the S ta te o f Washing
ton may not c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y s u b j e c t them
t o p o l i t i c a l h u r d l e s , n o t a p p l i c a b l e
t o o t h e r c i t i z e n s , t h a t im p e d e t h e i r
achievement o f th a t g o a l . In s h o r t , the
taged c l a s s i s d e f in e d by the race o f i t s
members, the law o f f e n d s the Equal P r o t e c
t i o n Clause r e g a r d le s s o f th e m o t iv a t i o n
£ . 1 6 /
o f i t s proponents .
15/ continued
s o c i a l v a l i d i t y o f r a c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n i s
not at i s su e here . What i s at i s su e i s
the r i g h t o f b lack c i t i z e n s t o pursue that
l e g i t i m a t e governmental o b j e c t i v e through
l a w f u l p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s e s on th e same
b a s i s as a l l o th e r c i t i z e n s are perm itted
t o pursue t h e i r l e g i t i m a t e governmental
e n d s .
1 6 / Much i s made by a p p e l l a n t s o f th e
f a c t t h a t th e p r o v i s i o n s i n Hunter and
Lee d e f in e d the fo r b id d e n s u b j e c t - m a t t e r
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n in terms o f the s u b j e c t -
matter on which a s p e c i a l p o l i t i c a l burden
was p l a c e d by t h e S t a t e ( i . e . , f a i r
housing r e g u l a t i o n in Hunter and student
r e a s s i g n m e n t t o a c h i e v e i n t e g r a t i o n in
Le e ) , and a c c o r d i n g l y u s e d t h e word
" r a c e , " w hi le the d r a f t e r s o f I n i t i a t i v e
350 d e f in e d the s u b j e c t - m a t t e r c l a s s i f i
c a t i o n in terms o f a l l o f th e s u b j e c t
m a t t e r s on which the s p e c i a l p o l i t i c a l
burden was n ot p l a c e d ( i . e . , e v e r y use
o f s t u d e n t r e a s s ig n m e n t sav e f o r i n t e
g r a t i o n ) , and thereby avoided using the
word " r a c e . " However , i t was not the
wording o f the laws in Hunter and Lee, o r
even any f a c i a l n o n n e u t r a l i t y in t h a t
w o r d i n g , t h a t r e n d e r e d t h o s e laws un-
44
To p u t i t b l u n t l y , members o f th e
p o l i t i c a l m a j o r i t y in W ash in g ton have
passed a law r e q u i r i n g r a c i a l m i n o r i t i e s
t o seek s ta te w id e approval o f govermental
a c t i o n on t h e i r b e h a l f , whi le i n s i s t i n g
t h a t a c t i o n on e v e r y one e l s e ' s b e h a l f
need o n l y s e c u r e t h e a p p r o v a l o f l o c a l
o f f i c i a l s . As a r e s u l t , t h e i n t e r n a l
16/ cont inued
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . As the Hunter Court n o t
e d , th ose laws on t h e i r f a c e s " t r e a t [ e d ]
Negro and w h i t e , Jew and g e n t i l e i n an
i d e n t i c a l m a t t e r . " Hunter v . E r i c k s o n ,
s u p r a , 393 U.S. at 391. The Court s t ru ck
down the laws in Hunter and Lee because i t
was c l e a r , o n c e th e " c o v e r t " s t a t u t o r y
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s they c re a te d were exposed
( s e e P e r s o n n e l A d m in is t ra t io n v . Feeney,
4 42 U. S . ...2'5_67'"'"2T4'"TT979 ) ) , ..t h a T f h e y
separated persons f o r d i f f e r e n t i a l t r e a t
ment a long l i n e s th a t corresponded e x a c t l y
( r a t h e r than o n ly approx im a te ly , as in ,
e . g . , Feeney , s u p r a ; V i l l a g e o f A r l in g t o n
Heights v. M e tr o p o l i ta n Housing A u t h o r i t y ,
429 U.S. 252 (1 977 ) ; Washington v . Davis
426 U .S . 229 ( 1 9 7 6 ) ; and James v . V a l -
t i e r r a , 402 U.S. 137 ( 1 971 ) ) t o the race
o f the persons a d v e r s e ly a f f e c t e d . I t i s
in t h i s sense that the o f f e n s i v e c l a s s i f i
c a t i o n s were " e x p l i c i t l y r a c i a l , " and thus
45
p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s e s g o v e r n i n g p u b l i c
e d u ca t io n in Washington are not o rgan ized
"on the b a s i s o f any gen era l p r i n c i p l e , "
Hunter v. E r i c k s o n , s u p r a , 393 U.S. at 395
( H a r l a n , J . , c o n c u r r i n g ) , and do n o t
" t r e a t [] a l l i n d iv id u a l s as eq u a ls " r e
g a r d l e s s o f r a c e , Mobile v . Bolden, s u p r a ,
16/ cont inued
u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , r e g a r d l e s s o f the motive
f o r d raw in g them. Hunter v . E r i c k s o n ,
s u p r a , 393 U.S at 389; see notes 5, 8,
supra.
The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n drawn by I n i t i a t i v e
350 i s nonneutral and e x p l i c i t l y r a c i a l
in p r e c i s e l y the same way as the c l a s s i f i
c a t i o n s s t r u c k down in Hunter and Lee .
Indeed, as the d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s f a c t f i n d -
ings make c l e a r , the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n drawn
by I n i t i a t i v e 350 — between m i n o r i t i e s
f a v o r i n g mandatory student assignment t o
r e l i e v e them o f r a c i a l i s o l a t i o n and a l l
o t h e r persons seeking b e n e f i c i a l govern
m en ta l a c t i o n r e l a t i n g t o e d u c a t i o n o r
s tudent assignment — i s i d e n t i c a l t o the
e x p l i c i t l y r a c i a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s truck
down in Lee . See 473 F. Supp. at 1008-09
(F indings o f Fact 7 . 8 , 7 . 9 , 7 .1 8 , 7 . 1 9 ) .
Put s im ply , i t was the substance o f
the laws s t ruck down in Hunter and Lee,
- 46
446 U.S. at 84 (S te ve n s , J. , c o n c u r r i n g ) .
R a t h e r , t h e y deny th e b l a c k v i c t i m s o f
s c h o o l s e g r e g a t i o n t h e same d e g r e e o f
p o l i t i c a l p r o t e c t i o n a f f o r d e d a l l o t h e r
c i t i z e n s by the laws o f the S t a t e . T h is ,
in i t s rawest form, i s the d e n ia l o f " the
e q u a l p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e l a w s . " I t i s
u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l u n d e r t h e F o u r t e e n t h
Amendment.
16/ cont inued
and i t i s t h e i d e n t i c a l s u b s t a n c e o f
I n i t i a t i v e 350 - - t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e o f
t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n drawn t o th e r a c e o f
the persons a d v e r s e ly a f f e c t e d — r a th e r
than the form o r s p e c i f i c wording o f those
p r o v i s i o n s that (b a rr in g some com p e l l in g
j u s t i f i c a t i o n ) render a l l three u n c o n s t i
t u t i o n a l i r r e s p e c t i v e o f the m o t iv a t i o n o f
t h e i r d r a f t e r s .
47
I I
RACIAL INTEGRATION OF PUBLIC EDUCA
TION, WHICH INITIATIVE 350 NON-
NEUTRALLY FRUSTRATES, IS A LEGITIMATE,
INDEED PRESSING, POLITICAL OBJECTIVE
OF BLACK CITIZENS IN APPELLEE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS. __________________________________
W hile w h i t e s t u d e n t s o f t e n b e n e f i t
f r o m i n t e r r a c i a l a s s o c i a t i o n , e . g . ,
R e g e n t s o f the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a
v ^ _ B a k k e , 438 U . S . 2 6 5 , 3 1 4 - 1 5 ( 1 9 7 8 )
(P ow e l l , J . ) , the co u r t s below found that
t h e p e r s o n s i n f a c t d i s a d v a n t a g e d by
I n i t i a t i v e 350 were the b l a c k and o t h e r
m i n o r i t y s t u d e n t s l i v i n g in s e g r e g a t e d
neighborhoods in a p p e l l e e d i s t r i c t s who,
but f o r the enactment o f the I n i t i a t i v e ,
would be ass igned to r a c i a l l y in t e g r a t e d
p u b l i c s c h o o l s . See 633 F.2d at 1343-44.
The p a r e n t s o f t h e s e m i n o r i t y s t u d e n t s
b e l i e v e t h a t r a c i a l l y i n t e g r a t e d p u b l i c
e d u ca t io n in t h e i r s ch o o l d i s t r i c t s would
b e n e f i t t h e i r c h i l d r e n a n d , p r i o r t o
48
I n i t i a t i v e 3 5 0 ' s e n a c t m e n t , c o n v i n c e d
a p p e l l e e d i s r i c t s t o pursue that o b j e c
t i v e in an e f f e c t i v e manner. R egard less
o f w h e th e r t h e s e p a r e n t s a re r i g h t o r
wrong in t h e i r b e l i e f , the S ta te o f Wash
in g to n may not c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y s u b j e c t
them, but no o t h e r c i t i z e n s , t o p o l i t i c a l
h u rd les that impede t h e i r achievement o f
l e g i t i m a t e governmental a c t i o n c o n s i s t e n t
with those b e l i e f s . See Part I , s u p r a .
M o r e o v e r , t h e r e can be no q u e s t i o n
th a t i t i s a l e g i t i m a t e governmental o b
j e c t i v e f o r a l o c a l s c h o o l d i s t r i c t vo lu n
t a r i l y t o seek t o d e se g re g a te i t s s c h o o l s
t h r o u g h " e x e r c i s e o f i t s d i s c r e t i o n a r y
power t o a s s i g n s t u d e n t s w i t h i n T i t s ]
s c h o o l s y s t e m f ] . " McDaniel v . B a r r e s i , 402
U.S. 39, 42 ( 1971 ) . See note 7 , s u p r a .
I t i s e q u a l l y w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d that "bus
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n [ i s ] a normal and a cce p te d
t o o l o f e d u c a t i o n a l p o l i c y , " Swann v .
49
C h a r l o t t e - M e c k l e n b u r g Board o f E d u ca t io n ,
402 U .S . 1, 29 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , which "has l o n g
been an i n t e g r a l p ar t o f a l l p u b l i c educa
t i o n a l sys tem s , " and that " i t i s u n l i k e l y
t h a t a t r u l y e f f e c t i v e [ d e s e g r e g a t i o n ]
remedy co u ld be dev ised without cont inued
r e l i a n c e upon i t . " North C aro l in a Board o f
E d u c a t i o n v . S w a n n , 402 U . S . 4 3 , 46
17/
(1971 ) . —
17/ In the l a s t decade , the debate over
s c h o o l d e s e g r e g a t i o n has o f t e n degenerated
i n t o a debate over " f o r c e d b u s i n g . " The
t e r m " f o r c e d b u s i n g " i s a m i s n o m e r .
Schoo l d i s t r i c t s do not f o r c e c h i l d r e n t o
r i d e a bus , but o n ly t o a r r i v e on time at
t h e i r ass igned s c h o o l s . When that s c h o o l
i s beyond walking d i s t a n c e — f o r whatever
reason — parents not on ly do not o b j e c t
t o bu s in g , they i n s i s t on i t , and have f o r
many y e a r s . Thus, b u s i n g c h i l d r e n t o
s c h o o l doubled during the 1930s, grew by
70 p e r ce n t in the 1940s, and in creased by
more than a t h i r d between 1960 and 1970.
METROPOLITAN APPLIED RESEARCH CENTER,
BUSING TASK FORCE FACT BOOK 22-24 (1 9 7 2 ) ;
HEW, N at iona l Center f o r Educat ional Sta
t i s t i c s , T a b l e , in G. ORFIELD, MUST WE
BUS? 130 ( 1 978) . By 1969, p r i o r t o the
advent o f c o u r t - o r d e r e d mandatory r a c i a l
ba lance plans in the wake o f Alexander v.
Holmes County Board o f Educat ion , 396 U.S.
- 50
A lt h o u g h a p p a r e n t l y c o n c e d i n g i t s
l e g i t i m a c y as a g o v e r n m e n t a l o b j e c t i v e ,
17 / cont inued
19 (1 9 6 9 ) , almost 60 p e r ce n t o f a l l s c h o o l -
age c h i l d r e n were t ra n s p o r te d t o s c h o o l .
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, TRANSPORTA
TION CHARACTERISTICS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN 7,
10-15 (1 9 7 2 ) . Even today , o v e r 97 p e r ce n t
o f p u b l i c - s c h o o l b u s i n g i s f o r p u r p o s e s
o t h e r than d e s e g r e g a t i o n . The New York
T im e s , D ec . 4 , 1980, § 1 , a t 25 , C o l . 1.
The p a re n ta l demand f o r busing stems
from the f a c t that r i d i n g a bus t o s c h o o l
i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y s a f e r than w a l k i n g . A
s t u d y by th e P e n n s y l v a n i a Department o f
Education found that c h i l d r e n who walk t o
s c h o o l are in three t imes as much danger
as those who r i d e the bus , w h i le the Na
t i o n a l S a f e t y C o u n c i l r e p o r t s t h a t boys
are three t im es , and g i r l s two t im es , as
l i k e l y t o h a v e an a c c i d e n t w a l k i n g t o
s c h o o l than i f t h e y r i d e in a b u s . See
U .S . COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS, PUBLIC
KNOWLEDGE AND BUSING OPPOSITION 17 (1 9 73 ) .
Other s t a t i s t i c s e s t a b l i s h that r i d i n g the
bus i s s a f e r than r i d i n g in a c a r . B uses :
Backbone o f Urban T r a n s i t , The A m er ican
C i t y , Dec". 1 974, at 23; NATIONAL ASSOCIA
TION OF MOTOR BUS OWNERS, BUS FACTS 17
( 3 9 t h e d . 1 9 7 2 ) . I t i s a l s o s a f e r t o
r i d e a bus t o p^ b JL _i c s c h o o l t h a n t o
p r i v a t e s c h o o l , p r im a r i l y because p r i v a t e
and p a r o c h i a l s c h o o l s r e l y h e a v i l y on
w o r n - o u t b u s e s p u r c h a s e d f r o m p u b l i c
s c h o o l systems a f t e r years o f use . School
Bus Task F o r c e , in 120 CONG. REC. 8757
( 1 9 7 4 ) . C f . G. ORFIELD, s u p r a , a t 129
51
the Government n e v e r t h e le s s q u e s t i o n s the
e f f i c a c y o f s c h o o l d e s e g r e g a t i o n f o r b lack
s t u d e n t s , p u r p o r t e d l y on th e b a s i s o f
s o c i a l s c i e n c e data . B r i e f f o r the United
17/ cont inued
(when a parent removes h is c h i l d from a
d esegregated s c h o o l and p la c e s the c h i l d
in a p r i v a t e s c h o o l , the l e n g t h o f the
c h i l d ' s bus r id e i n c r e a s e s , on average ,
by 70 p e r c e n t ) .
As i s a t t e s t e d by the huge in c r e a s e
in busing o v e r the l a s t 50 y e a r s , busing
per se does not have any n ega t iv e educa
t i o n a l e f f e c t s . Nor i s there any ev iden ce
that a t ten d in g a s c h o o l o t h e r than the one
n ea res t the s t u d e n t ' s home n e g a t i v e l y a f
f e c t s academic achievement o r a s c h o o l ' s
s o c i a l c l i m a t e . Davis , Busing, in 2 R.
CRAIN, e t a l . , SOUTHERN SCHOOLS: AN EVALU
ATION OF THE EMERGENCY SCHOOL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM AND OF SCHOOL DESEGREGATION 118
( 1 9 7 3 ) ; Z o l o t h , The Impact o f Busing on
Student Achievement, 7 GROWTH & CHANGE 45
(Ju ly 1976).
In s h o r t , notwithstanding the f o c u s
o f the opponents o f mandatory d e se g re g a
t i o n on " f o r c e d b u s i n g , " the s o c i a l s c i e n
t i f i c l i t e r a t u r e u n e q u iv o c a l ly e s t a b l i s h e s
that p u b l i c a l l y prov ided t r a n s p o r t a t i o n to
t o s c h o o l s i s a s a f e , indeed n e c e s s a r y ,
c o m p o n e n t n o t o n l y o f d e s e g r e g a t i o n
e f f o r t s b u t , much more p e r v a s i v e l y , o f
p u b l i c ed u ca t ion in g e n e r a l .
52
S t a t e s , at pp. 38 -39 , n. 39. However, a
r e c e n t comprehensive review o f the s o c i a l
s c i e n c e l i t e r a t u r e on p u b l i c s c h o o l d e s e
g r e g a t i o n e s t a b l i s h e s that the e d u c a t i o n a l
o p p o r t u n i t i e s and achievement o f b la ck and
o t h e r m in o r i t y s tudents are s u b s t a n t i a l l y
enhanced by the use o f s tudent assignment
t o a ch ie v e r a c i a l i n t e g r a g i o n . Hawley,
"The Fa lse Premises o f A n t i -B u s in g L e g i s
l a t i o n , " tes t im ony b e f o r e the Subcom. on
S e p a r a t i o n o f P o w e rs , Sen. Com. on th e
J u d i c i a r y , 97th C o n g . , 1 s t S e s s . ( S e p
tember 30, 1981) (summarizing f i n d i n g s )
( h e r e i n a f t e r " H a w l e y t e s t i m o n y " ) ? W.
HAWLEY, e t a l . , 1 ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT
KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
1j8/ For the reasons s e t out in note 15^
s u p r a , t h i s q u e ry by th e Government i s
i r r e l e v a n t here . N o n e th e le s s , the sug
g e s t i o n that d e s e g r e g a t i o n i s not e f f e c
t i v e i s so t h o r o u g h l y i n a c c u r a t e t h a t
amicus i s compelled t o respond.
53
SCHOOL DESEGRATION STRATEGIES, STRATEGIES
FOR EFFECTIVE DESEGREGATION: A SYNTHESIS
OF FINDINGS 17-50 (1 9 8 1 ) ( h e r e i n a f t e r
" S y n t h e s i s " ) ? C. ROSSELL, e t a l . , 5 AS
SESSMENT OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF SCHOOL DESEGREGATION
STRATEGIES, A REVIEW OF THE EMPIRICAL
RESEARCH ON DESEGREGATION: COMMUNITY RES
PONSE, RACE RELATIONS, ACADEMIC ACHIEVE
MENT AND RESEGREGATION (1981) ( h e r e i n a f t e r
"Review o f Empir ica l R e s e a r c h " ) . For the
conven ience o f the Court, c o p i e s o f these
m a t e r i a l s , which s y n t h e s iz e the massive
body o f s o c i a l s c i e n c e research concern ing
s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s undergoing a c tu a l su s
t a i n e d d e s e g r e g a t i o n o v e r th e l a s t 15
y e a r s , have been lodged with the C l e r k ' s
o f f i c e .
B r i e f l y s t a t e d , th e s o c i a l s c i e n c e
r e v i e w has f o u n d , i n t e r a l i a , t h a t :
54 -
1. The use o f s tudent assignment as
a d e s e g r e g a t i o n method has reduced r a c i a l
i s o l a t i o n in every s c h o o l system s tu d ie d
1 9/
n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any " w h i t e f l i g h t . "
2. D esegregat ion as a g e n e ra l r u le
cannot be accomplished e f f e c t i v e l y w ithout
u s i n g s t u d e n t a s s i g n m e n t . " V o l u n t a r y "
p l a n s , which r e l y e x c l u s i v e l y on student
c h o i c e as t o whether t o be re a ss ig n e d to
a d ese g re ga te d s c h o o l o r a "magnet" s c h o o l
program, have proven to be almost t o t a l l y
i n e f f e c t i v e in r e d u c i n g r a c i a l i s o l a -
2 0/
t i o n .
3. A t t e n d i n g r a c i a l l y i n t e g r a t e d
19/ Hawley t e s t im o n y , at 2 - 9 ; S y n t h e s i s ,
at 17-34 ; R o s s e l l , "The E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f
D e s e g r e g a t i o n P la n s in R e d u c in g R a c i a l
I s o l a t i o n , White F l i g h t , and A ch iev in g a
P o s i t i v e Community Response" in Review o f
E m pir ica l Research , a t 1 -87.
2 0 / Id . Compare, e . g . , Columbus Board o f
Education v . P e n i c k , 443 U.S. 449, 459-60
(1979) ( d e s e g r e g a t i o n p lans that do not
i n v o l v e s t u d e n t a s s ig n m e n t have p r o v e n
i n e f f e c t i v e ) .
55
s c h o o l s s u b s t a n t i a l l y — o f t e n dram at ic
a l l y — enhances the academic achievement
o f b la ck s tudents as revea led by commonly
used achievement and I .Q . measures. Gains
are g r e a t e s t when i n t e g r a t i o n s t a r t s in
th e e a r l i e s t g r a d e s . The a c h ie v e m e n t
l e v e l s o f white students in in t e g r e g a t e d
s c h o o l s do not s u f f e r , while race r e l a -
2 1 /t i o n s among a l l s t u d e n t s i m p r o v e . —
As t h i s r e s e a r c h d e m o n s t r a t e s , th e
g o a l o f e f f e c t i v e p u b l i c - s c h o o l i n t e g r a
t i o n i s n o t o n l y a p r o p e r g o v e r n m e n t a l
o b j e c t i v e , but one t h a t th e b l a c k s in
a p p e l l e e d i s t r i c t s who d e s i r e i t , and who
are u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y burdened by I n i t i a
t i v e 350 i n a c h i e v i n g i t , c o r r e c t l y
p e r c e i v e as c r u c i a l t o t h e i r f u t u r e
w e l l - b e i n g .
21/ Hawley tes t im on y , at 10-13? Crain &
Mahard, "Some P o l i c y I m p l i c a t i o n s o f the
D e se g re g a t io n -M in o r i ty Achievement L i t e r a
tu re " in Review o f Empir ical Research , at
172-208
56
CONCLUSION
The ju dgem ent o f the N inth C i r c u i t
should be a f f i r m e d .
R e s p e c t fu l l y su bm itted ,
JACK GREENBERG
JAMES M. NABRIT, I ' l l
BILL LANN LEE *
JAMES S. LIEBMAN
S u ite 2030
10 Columbus C i r c l e
New York, New York 10019
*Counsel o f Record
A ttorn eys f o r NAACP Legal
Defense & E du cat ion a l
Fund as Amicus Curiae
MEIIEN PRESS INC — N. Y. C. 219