Citation network
Columbus Bd. of Educ. Vs. Penick
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jul 02, 1979
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. 449 (1979) U.S. Supreme Court Columbus Bd. of Educ. v. PenickSearch
-
U.S. 449 (1979) Columbus Bd. of Educ. v. PenickSearch
-
an opinion and order containing its findings of fact and conclusions of law. It found (1) that in 1954, when Brown v. BoardSearch
-
that, since the decision in Brown v. BoardSearch
-
the submission of a systemwide desegregation plan. Subsequently, following the decision in Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
to prove the ultimate fact of a forbidden purpose, the court stayed well within the requirements of Washington v. DavisSearch
-
U. S. 229 , and Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
commensurate with the violation ascertained. Pp. 443 U. S. 465 -467. (c) Nor was there any misuse of Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
the submission of a systemwide desegregation plan. Following decision by this Court in Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
the District Court found that, in 1954, when Brown v. PageSearch
-
F.2d at 798-799, quoting Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
B Second, both courts below declared that, since the decision in Brown v. BoardSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Green v. CountySearch
-
Wright v. CouncilSearch
-
United States v. ScotlandSearch
-
Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
is therefore beyond question, McDaniel Page 443 U. S. 461 v. BarresiSearch
-
of the controlling law. It is urged that the courts below failed to heed the requirements of Keyes, Washington v. DavisSearch
-
U. S. 229 (1976), and Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Ibid. The District Court thus stayed well within the requirements of Washington v. DavisSearch
-
and Arlington Heights. See Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. FeeneySearch
-
roughly within proportionate racial balance. We see no misuse of mathematical ratios under our decision in Swann v Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
ruled in 1888 that state law no longer required or permitted the segregation of schoolchildren. Board of Education v. StateSearch
-
Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339 , 100 U. S. 347 (1880). Thus, in Yick Wo v HopkinsSearch
-
action. Even actions of state agents that may be illegal under state law are attributable to the State. United States v. PriceSearch
-
Screws v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 325 U. S. 91 (1945). Our decision in Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
institutional purpose and which did not add up to a facially substantial systemwide impact. Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
found, petitioners' evidence in this respect was insufficient to counter respondents' proof. See Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
Mt. Healthy City Bd. of Education v. DoyleSearch
-
of the school system. Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
is said by JUSTICES REHNQUIST and POWELL in their dissenting opinions in this case and in Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
at the time of Brown v. BoardSearch
-
Page 443 U. S. 470 by this Court throughout the course of school desegregation controversies, from Brown v. BoardSearch
-
to Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
where they sit. Whether actions that produce racial separation are intentional within the meaning of Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
Washington v. DavisSearch
-
and Arlington Heights v. MetropolitanSearch
-
factual inquiries into the breadth of any constitutional violation, and hence of any permissible remedy. See Milliken v. BradleySearch
-
are as elusive as these, who bears the burden of proof can easily determine who prevails in the litigation. Speiser v. RandallSearch
-
justified because, in common experience, some facts are likely to follow from others. See Ulster County Court v. AllenSearch
-
reference to an affirmative duty stemming from the situation in 1954. I think the Court's decision in Keyes v. SchoolSearch
-
Although, as the Court stressed in Green v. CountySearch
-
by the District Court used numerical guidelines, but it was not for that reason invalid. As this Court said in Swann v. Charlotte-MecklenburgSearch
-
cannot say that the remedy was improper. For these reasons, I concur in the result in Columbus Board of Education v. PenickSearch
-
and dissent in Dayton Board of Education v. BrinkmanSearch
-
See United States v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial