US v. Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago, 80 C 5124
Citation | 567 F. Supp. 290 |
Decision Date | 14 July 1983 |
Docket Number | 76 C 995 and 76 C 996.,No. 80 C 5124,80 C 5124 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant. Kathy Sue JOHNSON, et al., and Darcel Milton, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF CHICAGO, et al., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Thomas H. Morsch, Shalom Kohn, Steven Baskin, Sidley & Austin, Chicago, Ill., for Johnson and Milton plaintiffs.
C. Richard Johnson, Hugh R. McCombs, Jr., Isham, Lincoln & Beale, and Robert C. Howard, Robert C. Weissbourd, Hatunian, Futterman & Howard, Chtd., Chicago, Ill., for Board of Educ.
William Bradford Reynolds, Asst. Atty. Gen., Civ. Rights Div., Dept. of Justice, Alexander C. Ross, Washington, D.C., for the U.S.
This Court's January 6, 1983 memorandum opinion and order in the United States action (the "Opinion," 554 F.Supp. 912, 928) approved the desegregation plan (the "Plan") developed by the Board of Education of the City of Chicago ("Board") "as being clearly within the `broad range of constitutionally acceptable plans'." Final judgment (the "Judgment") upholding the Plan's constitutionality was then entered February 11. Board has now moved for judgment as a matter of law in the Johnson and Milton cases recently consolidated with the United States action, arguing the Opinion and Judgment are dispositive of the constitutional issues raised in Johnson and Milton. For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion and order Board's motion is granted.
Some four years ago our Court of Appeals first dealt with the Johnson and Milton actions in Johnson v. Board of Education, 604 F.2d 504 (7th Cir.1979). It summarized the relevant factual background, id. at 507-09, footnote omitted:
In affirming the district court's order, the Court of Appeals concluded (id. at 518):
Accordingly, in view of the findings on the record of the existence of white flight and the compelling state interest in promoting integration, we hold that voluntary state action directed toward the prevention of de facto segregation in the public schools is constitutionally permissible where, as here, the racial quotas imposed in connection with the desegregation plan provide all students residing in the attendance areas with a meaningful opportunity to attend an integrated high school.
Although the Supreme Court initially granted certiorari, 448 U.S. 910, 100 S.Ct. 3055, 65 L.Ed.2d 1139 (1980), it later vacated that grant and remanded Johnson and Milton to our Court of Appeals to consider whether the actions were moot in light of (1) Board's decision to rescind the stabilization plans and (2) this Court's September 24, 1980 order approving and entering the Consent Decree (the "Decree") in the United States action. 449 U.S. 915, 101 S.Ct. 339, 66 L.Ed.2d 162 (1980). See Opinion, 554 F.Supp. at 913 n. 1. In turn our Court of Appeals remanded Johnson and Milton to this Court's colleague Judge Will, 645 F.2d 75 (7th Cir.1981).
Pending final development of the Plan, Board reinstated its stabilization plans for Morgan Park and Gage Park High Schools in April 1981. In June 1981 Judge Will accordingly found Johnson and Milton were not moot, but he again denied plaintiffs' motion for a permanent injunction against use of the challenged quotas. Our Court of Appeals (1) affirmed Judge Will's finding the cases were not moot and (2) reinstated its earlier opinion in Johnson. 664 F.2d 1069, 1073 (7th Cir.1981).
Once again the Supreme Court granted certiorari but then vacated and remanded in a per curiam opinion, 457 U.S. 52, 102 S.Ct. 2223, 72 L.Ed.2d 668 (1982). It said (id. at 53-54, 102 S.Ct. at 2224):
We agree with the Court of Appeals that the case is not moot and that the subsequent development i.e., entry of the Decree 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, No. 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' judgments in this case, the doctrine of the law of the case does not constrain either the District Court or, should an appeal subsequently be...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Board of Educ. of City of Chicago
... 588 F. Supp. 132 ... UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, ... BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF CHICAGO, Defendant ... No. 80 C 5124 ... United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D ... June 8, 1984 ... As Amended July 17, 1984. 588 F. Supp. 133 ... ...
-
Willan v. Menomonee Falls School Bd.
...plan by challenging only its effect on them as "bootless." Samayoa, supra, 798 F.2d at 1050, (quoting United States v. Chicago Board of Education, 567 F.Supp. 290, 296 (N.D.Ill. 1983)). The Willans' narrow challenge to chapter 220 is bootless as well. Even if the plaintiffs did not concede ......
-
Samayoa by Samayoa v. Chicago Bd. of Educ.
...798 F.2d 1046, that the plaintiffs have not stated a constitutional claim. It relied principally on United States v. Board of Education, 567 F.Supp. 290 (N.D.Ill.1983) (Johnson III ), which rejected a claim made by black students excluded from schools in Chicago in order to make room for wh......
-
Samayoa by Samayoa v. Chicago Bd. of Educ., 86-1355
...quotas, and an award of attorney's fees. We agree with the district court that the rationale of United States v. Chicago Board of Education (Johnson III), 567 F.Supp. 290 (N.D.Ill.1983), applies here. The plaintiffs in Johnson challenged as unconstitutional the desegregation plan voluntaril......