Johnson v. Board of Education of City of Chicago
| Decision Date | 07 June 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-1097,81-1097 |
| Citation | 72 L.Ed.2d 668,457 U.S. 52,102 S.Ct. 2223 |
| Parties | Kathy Sue JOHNSON, etc., et al. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF CHICAGO et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This case was commenced by petitioners challenging the voluntary adoption by the Board of Education of the city of Chicago of racial quotas on enrollment at two high schools. Petitioners alleged that the quotas, purportedly designed to arrest "white flight," were unlawful because they resulted in the denial of admission to those schools of some black applicants but no white applicants. The District Court upheld the plan, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. 604 F.2d 504 (CA7 1979). We granted certiorari, 448 U.S. 910, 100 S.Ct. 3055, 65 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1980), but then vacated the judgment and remanded the case "for further consideration in light of the subsequent development described in the suggestion of mootness filed by respondents." 449 U.S. 915, 101 S.Ct. 339, 66 L.Ed.2d 162 (1980). That development was the entry of a consent decree in a related case, United States v. Board of Education of Chicago, 88 F.Supp. 679 (ND Ill.), in which the Board of Education agreed to develop a systemwide integration plan, and the Board's announcement that it had abandoned use of the racial quotas at the two high schools. The Court of Appeals, 645 F.2d 75, remanded to the District Court to consider the suggestion of mootness. 645 F.2d 75 (1981). That court, finding that the Board had readopted the quotas, concluded without taking further evidence that the challenge was not moot. The Court of Appeals, 664 F.2d 1069, agreeing that the case was not moot and relying upon the doctrine of the law of the case, affirmed without reconsidering the constitutional challenge to the racial quotas in light of the subsequent development that the Board argued eliminated or reduced any discriminatory effects of the quotas. 664 F.2d 1069 (1981). Petitioners have now renewed their request for review.
We agree with the Court of Appeals that the case is not moot and that the subsequent development does not undermine that court's original decision upholding the racial quotas. However, since if we were to grant certiorari we would consider the constitutional challenge as an original matter, the subsequent development might well be relevant to that consideration. It was for that reason that we vacated the Court of Appeals' judgment for further consideration in light of the subsequent development. No additional evidence was taken and therefore neither the record nor the District Court or Court of Appeals opinions reflect the subsequent development. We therefore grant certiorari, vacate the judgment, and remand the case with the direction that the matter be consolidated with the ongoing proceeding in the District Court in United States v. Board of Education of Chicago, 80-C-5124, so that court may decide petitioners' challenge on the basis of a complete factual record. Because we have vacated the Court of Appeals'...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gutierrez v. Saenz
...NASD Dispute Resolution, Inc. v. Judicial Council , 488 F.3d 1065, 1069 (9th Cir. 2007) ; Johnson v. Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago , 457 U.S. 52, 53, 102 S.Ct. 2223, 72 L.Ed.2d 668 (1982). When a decision is vacated "all is effectually extinguished." Falcon v. Gen. Tel. Co. , 815 F.2d 317......
-
United States v. Board of Educ. of City of Chicago
...811, 817 (9th Cir. 1982); Johnson v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago, 664 F.2d 1069 (7th Cir.1981), vacated, 457 U.S. 52, 102 S.Ct. 2223, 72 L.Ed.2d 668 (1982); 1B Moore's ¶ 3. Because the following propositions were finally and explicitly decided by our Court of Appeals, under th......
-
Hampton v. Jefferson County Bd. of Educ.
...504, 516 (7th Cir.1979), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 449 U.S. 915, 101 S.Ct. 339, 66 L.Ed.2d 162 (1980) and 457 U.S. 52, 102 S.Ct. 2223, 72 L.Ed.2d 668 (1982) ("The Board's articulated purpose for the [voluntary] adoption of the Plans was the alleviation of de facto segregation a......
-
U.S. v. Cisneros
...it cannot be used to trigger the application of the law of the case doctrine. See, e.g., Johnson v. Bd. of Educ. of the City of Chicago, 457 U.S. 52, 53-54, 102 S.Ct. 2223, 72 L.Ed.2d 668 (1982); Brown v. Bryan County, OX 219 F.3d 450, 453 n. 1 (5th Cir.2000); Creighton v. Anderson, 922 F.2......
-
Appellate courts as first responders: the constitutionality and propriety of appellate courts' resolving issues in the first instance.
...See id. (111) See id. at 29 (majority opinion). (112) Id. at 36 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting). (113) Id; see also Johnson v. Bd. of Educ., 457 U.S. 52, 54 (1982) (Rehnquist, J., dissenting) (commenting, in an opinion joined by Justice Marshall, that nothing in the case record suggested any re......