Opinion ID: 381246
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Effect of the Amendments on the Enforcement Scheme

Text: 8 Enacted as floor amendments to appropriation bills, the amendments challenged here lack careful explanation or description of their intended effect on HEW's enforcement procedures under Title VI. (A lengthy footnote discusses the congressional debates over the amendments.) 26 Their general purpose, however, is clear. Congress wanted to ensure that no student would be transported beyond the school nearest his home 27 because of an HEW requirement. 28 9 Of course, as members of Congress were aware, HEW never had the authority to order any particular remedial plan. 29 Its enforcement authority permits it only to require assurances of compliance from applicants, and to seek enforcement through fund-termination proceedings or referral to the Department of Justice. 30 Nonetheless, as the legislative debates also acknowledge, the power to threaten fund-termination the power that attaches strings to financial assistance can often work coercively. 31 Thus, Congress explicitly intended that HEW could not use this power to require, directly or indirectly, 32 student transportation beyond the school closest to their home. Nor may it pressure a district to restructure grade levels offered at particular schools, thereby changing the location of the nearest school which provides the appropriate grade level 33 or course of study pursued by each student. 34 10 Although the sponsors maintained that HEW retains Title VI enforcement authority under the amendments, 35 the extent of that authority is not entirely apparent. 36 On the one hand, it is clear that the amendments leave intact HEW's entire administrative enforcement process, including fund-termination, for violations not calling for transportation remedies. 37 But the legislative debates do not identify when and through what procedures HEW can avoid funding schools known to violate the Constitution and Title VI. 38 Congress apparently intended HEW to retain the power to refer cases to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal action. 39 Congress neglected, however, to specify the steps HEW may take before a referral. Thus, although it expressly wished HEW to continue its role in seeking voluntary compliance, 40 Congress did not explain the extent of that role when transportation remedies are at issue. 41 The effect of the amendments is especially ambiguous insofar as they modify the order outstanding from earlier proceedings in this case. 42