Proposed Order for Preparing Metropolitan Desegregation Plans

Working File
January 1, 1972

Proposed Order for Preparing Metropolitan Desegregation Plans preview

4 pages

Cite this item

  • Michigan, Case Files, Milliken Hardbacks. Proposed Order for Preparing Metropolitan Desegregation Plans, 1972. 485e69f4-52e9-ef11-a730-7c1e5247dfc0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/deec39cf-aba7-44f3-b083-b77df489bb1f/proposed-order-for-preparing-metropolitan-desegregation-plans. Accessed September 17, 2025.

    Copied!

    j;
1

••

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

)
RONALD BRADLEY, et al, )

)
Plaintiffs, )

v. )
)

WILLIAM G. MILLIKEN, et al, )
)

Defendants, )
and )

)
DETROIT FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, LOCAL ) 
231, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, ) 
AFL-CIO, )

)
Defendant-Intervenor, )

and )
)

DENISE MAGDOWSKI, et al, )
)

Defendants-Intervenors, )
et al )
_______________________________________ )

' . . ■ f

i
I
!

.■ j
i
i
j

i

Civil Action 
No. 35257 f

i
!■ •* i

ORDER
FOR PREPARING METROPOLITAN DESEGREGATION PLANS

At a session of the United States 
District Court for the Eastern 
District of Michigan,held on the
____ day of ________ , 1972, in the
United States Federal Building, 
Detroit, Michigan.

PRESENT: Stephen J. Roth
United States Judge

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

j
1. The Defendant State Board of Education, in cooperation

j!and consultation with the various affected local school districts i
__ jis hereby ordered to prepare a pupil assignment plan for all 

students within the Detroit metropolitan school community.

2. Said plan shall provide for school attendance within



the following school "clusters:

No. 1

No. 2

No. 3

No. 4

No. 5

No. 6

No. 7

No. 8

Detroit Murray 
Melvindale 
Lincoln Park 
Allen Park 
Southgate

Detroit Southwestern
River Rouge
Wyandotte
Riverview
Trenton
Grosse lie

No . 9 Detroit Mumford 
Detroit Ford 
Bloomfield Hills 
West Bloomfield 
Walled Lake 
Avondale

No.10 Detroit Northern 
Highland Park 
Hazel Park 
Royal Oak 
Birmingham

Detroit Western
Van Buren
Ecorse
Taylor
Woodhaven
Romulus
Huron
Gibralter
Flat Rock

Detroit Chadsey 
Westwood 
Inkster 
Wayne
Cherry Hill

Detroit Nprthwestern
Crestwood
Dearborn
Dearborn Heights 
Fairlane 
Garden City
North Dearborn Heights

Detroit Mackenzie
Detroit Cody
Northville
Plymouth
Livonia
Redford Union
South Redford

Detroit Central
Ferndale
Oak Park
Berkley
Southfield

Detroit Cooley 
Detroit Redford 
Clarenceville 
Farmington 
Novi

No.11 Detroit Pershing 
Hamtramck 
Madison Heights 
Lamphere 
Clawson 
Troy

No.12 Pontiac 
Holly 
Brandon 
Waterford 
Lake Orion 
Oxford 
Rochester 
Clarkston 
Huron Valley 
South Lyon

No.13 Detroit Kettering 
Utica 
Warren

No.14 Detroit Northeastern 
Detroit Osborn 
Van Dyke 
Warren Woods 
Centerline 
Fitzgerald

No.15 Detroit King 
Grosse Pointe 
Harper Woods 
East Detroit

No. 16 Detroit Southeastern 
Lake Shore 
Lakeview 
Roseville 
South Lake

No. 17 Detroit Finney 
Detroit Denby 
Chippewa Valley 
Fraser 
Clintondale

- 2-



No. 18 Mt. Clemens 
Anchor Bay 
Richmond 
Romeo
L'Anse Creuse
Armada
New Haven

3. Within each cluster, the racial proportions in each 

school shall be so reflective of the racial proportion of the 

cluster as to render all the schools in the cluster non-racially 

identifiable. No strict racial quota shall be required, but any 

substantial deviation from the norm must be justified by compelling 

reasons of public convenience and necessity.

4. The Defendant State Board of Education shall present
! .
jthis pupil assignment plan to the Court on a date to be set by 

this Court, along with a report as to a feasible date or dates 

for implementing the plan as to all grades or as to specific 
grades.in stages.

5. Said report shall also include a statement of steps
I •
to be taken to preserve desegregation in each cluster, including, 

but not necessarily limited to, the following topics:

(a) Curriculum appropriate for multi­
racial student bodies;

(b) Avoidance of intra-school segre­
gation caused by "tracking," testing,

; grouping or similar devices;

(c) Provisions for student transportation;

(d) Provision of administrative staff, 
counselling staff and faculty appro­
priate to a multi-racial student body;

(e) Provision for inclusion of all students 
and their parents in the life of the 
school.

(f) Provision of in-service training to 
prepare teachers for multi-racial teaching 
situations.

- 3-



6. All parties and any school district affected shall 
be given the opportunity to respond to this plan and report as to 1
its practicalities within a time set by the Court and the Court jj

l| will hola a hearing subsequent to the filing of such* responses
| .I as to the plan's practicalities.!(ii

j tI
United States Judge

!

:
- 4-

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

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.