Bradley v. Milliken, Civ. A. No. 35257.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Court (Western District Michigan)
Citation345 F. Supp. 914
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 35257.
PartiesRonald 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-Intervenor.
Decision Date14 June 1972

Louis R. Lucas, William E. Caldwell, Ratner, Sugarmon & Lucas, Memphis, Tenn., J. Harold Flannery, Paul R. Dimond, Robert Pressman, Center for Law and Education, Cambridge, Mass., Jack Greenberg, Norman J. Chachkin, New York City, E. Winther McCroom, Cincinnati, Ohio, Nathaniel R. Jones, General Counsel, N. A. A. C. P., New York City, for plaintiffs.

Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., State of Mich., by Eugene Krasicky, Gerald Young, Asst. Attys. Gen., Lansing, Mich., for State defendants.

George T. Roumell, Jr., Louis D. Beer, Riley & Roumell, Detroit, Mich., for Detroit Board of Education.

Theodore Sachs, Ronald R. Helveston, Rothe, Marston, Mazey, Sachs, O'Connell, Nunn & Fried, Detroit, Mich., for intervenor Detroit Federation of Teachers.

Alexander B. Ritchie, Fenton, Nederlander, Dodge & Barris, P. C., Detroit, Mich., for intervenor Denise Magdowski, and others.

Robert J. Lord, Fair Haven, Mich., for intervenor Green, and others; Tri-County Citizens for Intervention.

Douglas H. West, Robert B. Webster, Hill, Lewis, Adams, Goodrich & Tait, Detroit, Mich., for intervenor Grosse Pointe Schools.

William M. Saxton, Butzel, Long, Gust, Klein & Van Zile, Detroit, Mich., for intervenor Allen Park Public Schools, and others.

Richard P. Condit, Condit & McGarry, P. C., Bloomfield Hills, Mich., for intervenor Southfield Public Schools.

Kenneth B. McConnell, Hartman, Beier, Howlett, McConnell & Googasian, Bloomfield Hills, Mich., for intervenor Royal Oak School District.

Ralph B. Guy, Jr., U. S. Atty., E. D. of Michigan, Detroit, Mich., for the United States, amicus curiae.


ROTH, District Judge.

On September 27, 1971, 338 F.Supp. 582, the court made its Ruling on Issue of Segregation, holding that illegal segregation exists in the public schools of the City of Detroit as a result of a course of conduct on the part of the State of Michigan and the Detroit Board of Education. Having found a constitutional violation as established, on October 4, 1971 the court directed the school board defendants, City and State, to develop and submit plans of desegregation, designed to achieve the greatest possible degree of actual desegregation, taking into account the practicalities of the situation. The directive called for the submission of both a "Detroit-only" and a "Metropolitan" plan.

Plans for the desegregation of the Detroit schools were submitted by the Detroit Board of Education and by the plaintiffs. Following five days of hearings the court found that while plaintiffs' plan would accomplish more desegregation than now obtains in the system, or which would be achieved under either Plan A or C of the Detroit Board of Education submissions, none of the plans would result in the desegregation of the public schools of the Detroit school district. The court, in its findings of fact and conclusions of law, concluded that "relief of segregation in the Detroit public schools cannot be accomplished within the corporate geographical limits of the city," and that it had the authority and the duty to look beyond such limits for a solution to the illegal segregation in the Detroit public schools. Accordingly, the court ruled, it had to consider a metropolitan remedy for segregation.

The parties submitted a number of plans for metropolitan desegregation. The State Board of Education submitted six—without recommendation, and without indicating any preference. With the exception of one of these, none could be considered as designed to accomplish desegregation. On the other hand the proposals of intervening defendant Magdowski, et al., the Detroit Board of Education and the plaintiffs were all good faith efforts to accomplish desegregation in the Detroit metropolitan area. The three plans submitted by these parties have many similarities, and all of them propose to incorporate, geographically, most—and in one instance, all—of the three-county area of Wayne, Oakland and Macomb.

The hearing on the proposals have set the framework, and have articulated the criteria and considerations, for developing and evaluating an effective plan of metropolitan desegregation. None of the submissions represent a complete plan for the effective and equitable desegregation of the metropolitan area, capable of implementation in its present form. The court will therefore draw upon the resources of the parties to devise, pursuant to its direction, a constitutional plan of desegregation of the Detroit public schools.

Based on the entire record herein, the previous oral and written rulings and orders of this court, and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law filed herewith, it is ordered:


A. As a panel charged with the responsibility of preparing and submitting an effective desegregation plan in accordance with the provisions of this order, the court appoints the following:*

1. A designee of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction;**
2. Harold Wagner, Supervisor of the Transportation Unit in the Safety and Traffic Education Program of the State Department of Education;
3. Merle Henrickson, Detroit Board of Education;
4. Aubrey McCutcheon, Detroit Board of Education;
5. Freeman Flynn, Detroit Board of Education;
6. Gordon Foster, expert for plaintiffs;
7. Richard Morshead, representing defendant Magdowski, et al.;
8. A designee of the newly intervening defendants;**
9. Rita Scott, of the Michigan Civil Rights Commission.

Should any designated member of this panel be unable to serve, the other members of the panel shall elect any necessary replacements, upon notice to the court and the parties. In the absence of objections within five days of the notice, and pending a final ruling, such designated replacement shall act as a member of the panel.

B. As soon as possible, but in no event later than 45 days after the issuance of this order, the panel is to develop a plan for the assignment of pupils as set forth below in order to provide the maximum actual desegregation, and shall develop as well a plan for the transportation of pupils, for implementation for all grades, schools and clusters in the desegregation area. Insofar as required by the circumstances, which are to be detailed in particular, the panel may recommend immediate implementation of an interim desegregation plan for grades K-6, K-8 or K-9 in all or in as many clusters as practicable, with complete and final desegregation to proceed in no event later than the fall 1973 term. In its transportation plan the panel shall, to meet the needs of the proposed pupil assignment plan, make recommendations, including the shortest possible timetable, for acquiring sufficient additional transportation facilities for any interim or final plan of desegregation. Such recommendations shall be filed forthwith and in no event later than 45 days after the entry of this order. Should it develop that some additional transportation equipment is needed for an interim plan, the panel shall make recommendations for such acquisition within 20 days of this order.

C. The parties, their agents, employees, successors. and all others having actual notice of this order shall cooperate fully with the panel in their assigned mission, including, but not limited to, the provision of data and reasonable full and part-time staff assistance as requested by the panel. The State defendants shall provide support, accreditation, funds, and otherwise take all actions necessary to insure that local officials and employees cooperate fully with the panel. All reasonable costs incurred by the panel shall be borne by the State defendants; provided, however, that staff assistance or other services provided by any school district, its employees or agents, shall be without charge, and the cost thereof shall be borne by such school district.


A. Pupil reassignment to accomplish desegregation of the Detroit public schools is required within the geographical area which may be described as encompassing the following school districts (see Exhibit P.M. 12), and hereinafter referred to as the "desegregation area":

                Lakeshore          Birmingham          Fairlane
                Lakeview           Hazel Park          Garden City
                Roseville          Highland Park       North Dearborn Heights
                South Lake         Royal Oak           Cherry Hill
                East Detroit       Berkley             Inkster
                Grosse Pointe      Ferndale            Wayne
                Centerline         Southfield          Westwood
                Fitzgerald         Bloomfield Hills    Ecorse
                Van Dyke           Oak Park            Romulus
                Fraser             Redford Union       Taylor
                Harper Woods       West Bloomfield     River Rouge
                Warren             Clarenceville       Riverview
                Warren Woods       Farmington          Wyandotte
                Clawson            Livonia             Allen Park
                Hamtramck          South Redford       Lincoln Park
                Lamphere           Crestwood           Melvindale
                Madison Heights    Dearborn            Southgate
                Troy               Dearborn Heights    Detroit

Provided, however, that if in the actual assignment of pupils it appears necessary and feasible to achieve effective and complete racial desegregation to reassign pupils of another district or other districts, the desegregation panel may, upon notice to the parties, apply to the court for an appropriate modification of this order.

B. Within the limitations of reasonable travel time and distance factors, pupil reassignments shall be effected within the clusters described in Exhibit P. M. 12 so as to achieve the greatest degree of actual desegregation to the end that, upon implementation, no school, grade or classroom be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Bradley v. Milliken, s. 75-2018
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • August 4, 1976
    ...(R) elief of segregation in the Detroit public schools cannot be accomplished within the corporate geographical limits of the city. 345 F.Supp. at 916 (1972). Judge Roth concluded that he had the duty to look beyond the limits of the Detroit school district for a solution to the illegal seg......
  • Milliken v. Bradley Allen Park Public Schools v. Bradley Grosse Pointe Public School System v. Bradley 8212 434, 73 8212 435 73 8212 436
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • July 25, 1974 school, grade or classroom (would be) substantially disproportionate to the overall pupil racial composition.' 345 F.Supp. 914, 918 (ED Mich.1972). (d) On July 11, 1972, and in accordance with a recommendation by the court-appointed desegregation panel, the District Court ordered the Det......
  • Hart v. Community Sch. Bd. of Brooklyn, NY Sch. D.# 21, 72 C 1041.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • April 2, 1974
    ...experts to assist in providing an effective remedy for high school students improperly expelled from school); Bradley v. Milliken, 345 F.Supp. 914, 916-917 (E.D.Mich.1972), aff'd in part, 484 F.2d 215 (6th Cir. 1973) (en banc), cert. granted, 414 U.S. 1038, 94 S.Ct. 538, 38 L.Ed.2d 329 (197......
  • Milliken v. Bradley
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 27, 1977
    .... (so that) no school, grade or classroom (would be) substantially disproportionate to the overall pupil racial composition." 345 F.Supp. 914, 918 (E.D.Mich.1972), quoted in Milliken I, supra, 418 U.S., at 734, 94 S.Ct., at 3122. On those premises, the District Court ordered the parties to ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT