Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): have motivated their actions in other areas of the system.” Keyes, 413 U.S. at 208, 93 S.Ct. 2686. Plaintiffs quote Dayton II for the proposition that such a system is “under a continuing duty to eradicate the effects of that system, and [ ]. the system-wide nature of the violation furnished pri-ma facie proof that current segregation in the [ ] schools was caused at least in part by prior intentionally segregative official acts.” Dayton II, 443 U.S. at 536, 99 S.Ct. 2971 (internal citation omitted). Keyes and Dayton II were ongoing school desegregation cases that involved purposeful discrimination by school systems attempting to avoid their affirmative obligation to undo systemic discrimination under Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 347 U.S. 483, 495, 74 S.Ct. 686, 98 L.Ed. 873 (1954) (Brown I) (<HOLDING>) and Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 349 U.S. 294, 301, 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the classofone equal protection theory has no place in the public employment context (B) holding that the concept of separate but equal has no place in public education (C) holding section 625 only requires a showing that the conduct was done in a place that is open to the public or where the public has a right to be (D) holding that segregation in public education is a denial of equal protection of the laws (E) holding that wisconsin violated equal protection rights of handicapped children by denying them an education at public expense
Output (English): holding that wisconsin violated equal protection rights of handicapped children by denying them an education at public expense