Citation network
Dayton Bd. of Educ. Vs. Brinkman
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 27, 1977
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 406 (1977) U.S. Supreme Court Dayton Bd. of Educ. v. BrinkmanSearch
-
U.S. 406 (1977) Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
a showing that this condition resulted from intentionally segregative actions on the part of the Board. Washington v. DavisSearch
-
be supplemented. Conclusions as to violations must be made in light of this Court's opinions here and in Washington v. DavisSearch
-
supra, and Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Housing Dev. Corp., 429 U. S. 252 , and a remedy must be fashioned in light of the rule laid down in Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
Board of Education, 402 U. S. 1 , and elaborated on in Hills v. GautreauxSearch
-
grant appropriate relief of this sort when constitutional violations on the part of school officials are proved. Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
Wright v. CouncilSearch
-
Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
cases have just as firmly recognized that local autonomy of school districts is a vital national tradition. Milliken v. BradleySearch
-
San Antonio School District v. RodriguezSearch
-
by factual proof and justified by a reasoned statement of legal principles. Cf. Pasadena City Board of Education v. SpanglerSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
of a showing that this condition resulted from intentionally segregative actions on the part of the Board. Washington v. DavisSearch
-
attendance zones for the three Dayton high schools, assuming that it was a violation under the standards of Washington v. DavisSearch
-
question of whether the Board was under a constitutional duty to take the action which it initially took. Cf. Hunter v. EricksonSearch
-
Brinkman v. GilliganSearch
-
Findings as to the motivations of multi-membered public bodies are, of necessity, difficult, cf. Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Board appealed the order of the District Court to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Brinkman v. GilliganSearch
-
white or predominantly black. This fact, without more, of course, does not offend the Constitution. Spencer v. KuglerSearch
-
require that any plan eliminate systemwide patterns of one-race schools predominant in the district. Brinkman v. GilliganSearch
-
the Court of Appeals, must make new findings and conclusions as to violations in the light of this opinion, Washington v. DavisSearch
-
U. S. 229 (1976), and Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
It must then fashion a remedy in the light of the rule laid down in Swann, and elaborated upon in Hills v. GautreauxSearch
-
Mlliken v. BradleySearch
-
U.S. at 418 U. S. 738 , quoting Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
Board of Education, 402 U. S. 1 , 402 U. S. 16 . See Rizzo v. GoodeSearch
-
Id. at 425 U. S. 293 -294. See also Austin Independent School Dist. v. UnitedSearch
-
Board which are intended to, and did in fact, discriminate against minority pupils, teachers, or staff. Washington v. DavisSearch
-
Circuit, that court affirmed the findings of fact but reversed and remanded as to the proposed remedial plan. Brinkman v. GilliganSearch
-
by the District Court. Id. at 114. In the decision now under review, the Court of Appeals affirmed. Brinkman v. GilliganSearch
-
Board of Education v. StateSearch
-
of the Board's action, rather than the subjective motivation of one or more members of the Board, see Washington v. DavisSearch
-
when constitutional violations on the part of school officials are proved. Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
with the result reached by the Court. I do so because it is clear from the holding in this case, and that in Milliken v. BradleySearch
-
they clearly are very significant as indicia of intent on the part of the School Board. As we emphasized in Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
Ante at 433 U. S. 290 (quoting Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Dayton Bd. of Educ. v. BrinkmanSearch
-
Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
of the Board. Washington v. DavisSearch
-
Washington v. DavisSearch
-
and Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
Cf. Pasadena City Board of Education v. SpanglerSearch
-
of Washington v. DavisSearch
-
Cf. Hunter v. EricksonSearch
-
Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
the Sixth Circuit. Brinkman v. GilliganSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial