Hart v. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ARLINGTON CTY., VIRGINIA, 71-1791.
Citation | 459 F.2d 981 |
Decision Date | 01 May 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 71-1791.,71-1791. |
Parties | John K. HART et al., Appellants, v. COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA, and Robert L. Chisolm, Division Superintendent of Schools for the County of Arlington, Appellees. |
Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit) |
Lawrence J. Latto, Washington, D. C. (S. W. Tucker, Henry L. Marsh, III, and Hill, Tucker & Marsh, Richmond, Va., Robert M. Alexander, Arlington, Va., Allison W. Brown, Jr., Washington, D. C., Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit, III, and Norman Chachkin, New York City, on brief), for appellants.
James H. Simmonds, Arlington, Va. (Gregory U. Evans, Arlington, Va., and R. D. McIlwaine, III, Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellees.
William H. Allen, John B. Jones, Jr., and Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., on brief, for amicus curiae, Arlington Council on Human Relations, Arlington Education Assn., Arlington Health and Welfare Council, Arlington View Civic Assn., League of Women Voters of Arlington, Nauck Civic Assn., Northern Va. Center for Social Development (four parishes: Our Lady of Lourdes, Our Lady Queen of Peace, St. Ann's, and St. Charles) Northern Va. Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union of Va., Positive Action Committee for Education, Rock Spring Congregational Church Bd. of Social Action, "Support Christian Action" House of the Little Falls Presbyterian Church.
Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, and BRYAN, WINTER, CRAVEN, RUSSELL and FIELD, Circuit Judges, in banc.
In this appeal, a plan, approved by the district court, to achieve a unitary school system in Arlington County is attacked because two formerly all-black elementary schools have been converted into special purpose schools, and the black pupils who formerly attended them have been assigned and are being transported to other formerly all-white schools. It is argued that, factually, the plan is discriminatory because the burden of transfer and transportation falls more heavily on the black students than on the white students, thus perpetuating the stigma of inferiority which a plan for a unitary system should be designed to obviate. We disagree.
In providing for the transition from a dual system of schools to a unitary system, school officials and the district court possess a measure of discretion how the system to be dismantled is to be rearranged, including what schools are to be continued to be used, so long as the end product is a unitary system. Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294, 75 S.Ct....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. BOARD OF SCH. COM'RS OF CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, IND., IP 68-C-225.
......, on behalf of themselves and all Negro school age children residing in the area served by .... Hamilton Southeastern Schools, Hamilton County, Indiana, et al., Additional Added Defendants. . ...School Board of City of Richmond, Virginia, 462 F.2d 1058 (4 Cir. 1972), (" Richmond "), ... case at hand the evidence shows that Arlington High School was opened in 1961 with a Negro ...Hart v. County School Board, 459 F.2d 981 (4 Cir. ......
-
Moss v. Stamford Board of Education, Civ. No. B-586.
...schools with low minority enrollments does not establish a violation of the equal protection clause. See Hart v. County School Board of Arlington County, 459 F.2d 981 (4th Cir. 1972); Gordon v. Jefferson Davis Parish School Board, 446 F.2d 266 (5th Cir. 1971), reh'g denied, 460 F.2d 1062 (1......
-
Medley v. School Board of City of Danville, Virginia, Civ. A. No. 71-C-44-D.
...plans. Thompson, supra; Copeland v. School Board of City of Portsmouth, 464 F.2d 932 (4th Cir. 1972); Hart v. County School Board of Arlington County, 459 F.2d 981 (4th Cir. 1972); Hightower v. West, Although the plaintiffs have contended that the racial characteristics of the elementary sc......
-
Thompson v. School Board of City of Newport News, Va., 74-1005.
...Dist. (8th Cir. 1971) 449 F.2d 493, and Hart v. County School Board of Arlington Co., Virginia (D.C. Va.1971) 329 F.Supp. 953, aff., 459 F.2d 981 (4th Cir.), cited in the earlier opinion in this The orders of the District Court, from which this appeal is taken, are accordingly affirmed. Aff......