Document: 458 U.S. 527 102 S.Ct. 3211 73 L.Ed.2d 948 Mary Ellen CRAWFORD, a Minor, etc., et al., Petitionersv.BOARD OF EDUCATION the CITY LOS ANGELES al. No. 81-38. Argued March 22, 1982. Decided June 30, Syllabus In California state-court action seeking desegregation of schools in Los Angeles Unified School District (District), trial court, 1970, found de jure segregation violation both State and Federal Constitutions ordered to prepare plan. The Supreme Court affirmed, but based its decision solely upon Equal Protection Clause Constitution, which bars facto as well segregation. On remand, court approved plan that included substantial mandatory pupil reassignment busing. While was considering alternative new plans 1979, voters ratified an amendment (Proposition I) Constitution provides state courts shall not order assignment or transportation unless federal "would be permitted under decisional law" do so remedy Fourteenth Amendment Constitution. denied District's request halt all busing, holding Proposition I applicable light court's 1970 finding Amendment. then implementation revised again Appeal reversed, concluding findings fact would support conclusion had violated through intentional also held constitutional barred part requiring student Held: does violate Pp. 535-545. (a) This Court's decisions will contention once choses "more" than requires, it may never recede. Such interpretation destructive State's democratic processes ability experiment dealing with problems heterogeneous population. embody, expressly implicitly, racial classification. simple repeal modification antidiscrimination laws, without more, embody presumptively invalid 535-540. (b) cannot characterized something more mere repeal. Hunter v. Erickson, 393 385, 89 557, 21 616, distinguished. still places school boards greater duty desegregate Nor allocate governmental judicial power on basis discriminatory principle. A "dual system"—one for majority one minority—is established simply because civil rights remedies are different from those available other areas. It people determine Amendment's standard appropriate apply cases repealed by I. 540-542. (c) Even if could assumed disproportionate adverse effect minorities, there is no reason differ appellate enacted purpose. purposes Proposition—chief among them educational benefits neighborhood schooling—are legitimate, nondiscriminatory objectives, claim intent millions "pure speculation." 543-545. 113 Cal.App.3d 633, 170 Cal.Rptr. 495, affirmed. Laurence H. Tribe, Cambridge, Mass., petitioners. G. William Shea, Angeles, Cal., respondents. Sol. Gen. Rex E. Lee, Washington, D. C., United States amicus curiae special leave Court. Justice POWELL delivered opinion 1 An question our whether this provision itself 2 * litigation began almost 20 years ago 1963, when minority students attending (District) filed class schools.1 case went some five later, issued substantially segregated Constitutions. immediate use. App. 139. 3 appeal, basis. Crawford Board Education, 17 Cal.3d 280, 130 724, 551 P.2d 28 (1976). see 117, 120-121, affirmance Constitution.2 explained "state . bear obligation take reasonable steps alleviate public schools, origin." Cal.3d, at 290, Cal.Rptr., 730, P.2d, 34. remanded preparation "reasonably feasible" desegregation. Id., 310, 744, 48.3 4 rejected mostly voluntary ultimately second transportation—"busing"—on ethnic basis.4 put into fall 1978, after year's experience, parties were dissatisfied. See 636, 497 (1981). Although continued operation, alternatives October 1979. 5 November 1979 I, Due Process Clauses Constitution.5 conforms busing exercised Amendment: 6 "[N]o impose any entity, board, official responsibility respect use transportation, (1) except specific such party constitute 14th (2) law Clause. ."6 7 Following approval asked Superior pupils. 185. May 19, 1980, application. reasoned Shortly thereafter, plan, relied transportation.7 8 reversed. 495 segregation.8 Thus, bar transportation. Moreover, concluded 654, 509. retain against provided Ibid. adopted 654-655, 509.9 9 Determining constitutional, vacated orders entered hearing. Pet. Cert. 73a.10 We granted certiorari. 454 892, 386, 70 206 II 10 agree rejecting chooses recede.11 reject experiment. has 11 inhibit enforcement requirement. Quite contrary, plain language seeks only embrace requirements assignments paradoxical conclude adopting Amendment, thereby it. even imposes continue have districts techniques, been themselves state-law reasonably feasible desegregate, they remain free adopt effectuate desegregation.12 12 Nonetheless, petitioners contend unconstitutional face. They argue employs "explicit classification" "race-specific" burden minorities vindicate state-created rights. By limiting enforce right desegregated contend, creates system" discriminates race.13 emphasize vindicated limitation remedies. Petitioners created supported compelling interest. 13 employed classification necessary further "A classification, regardless purported motivation, can upheld extraordinary justification." Personnel Administrator Massachusetts Feeney, 442 256, 272, 99 2282, 2292, 60 870 (1979). McLaughlin Florida, 379 184, 196, 85 283, 222 (1964). But classification.14 neither says nor implies persons treated differently account their race. forbids absence violation. benefit confer—neighborhood schooling—is made race discretion boards.15 Indeed, racially effect, view demographic mix clear races affected most what way.16 addition, previously neutral disproportionately minority, purpose shown.17 14 Similarly, recognized distinction exist between addresses, fashion, race-related matters.18 implicit repeated statement legislation policies required first place. Dayton Bd. Education Brinkman, 433 406, 414, 97 2766, 2772, 53 851 (1977), we board's repudiation earlier resolution calling did Amendment.19 Reitman Mulkey, 387 369, 376, 87 1627, 1631, 18 830 (1967), 390, n. 5, 560, 616 (1969), careful note laws review "mere[ly] repeal" existing legislation.20 sum, viewed embodying classification.21 15 Were hold unconstitutional, limit seriously authority deal committed irrevocably proved unsuccessful harmful practice. And certainly advanced discouraged providing protection minorities.22 furthered maintain designed ameliorate relations protect produced just opposite effects.23 Yet these results unworkable relevant case, interpret require adhere construction vests final people. III 16 seek avoid force foregoing considerations arguing "mere repeal." Relying primarily supra, fundamentally alters system "those redress isolation must satisfied less full relief court."24 controlling here, persuaded petitioners' characterization Akron city charter amended provide ordinance regulating real estate race, color, religion, national origin until referendum. As result amendment, fair housing ordinance, City Council date, longer effective. ordinance. "not suspended operation forbidding discrimination, electors before future [antidiscrimination] effect." U.S., 389-390, S.Ct., 559-560. whereas ordinances property Council, prohibiting discrimination forced additional hurdle.25 such, placed impermissible, "special burde[n] within process." 391, 560-561.26 involved ordinance; anti-discrimination minorities—were "singled out referendums while group face[d] obstacle." James Valtierra, 402 137, 142, 91 1331, 1334, 678 (1971). contrast, assumption benefited law, "repeal" noted above, 19 said distorts political process reasons allocates "The things though same." Tigner Texas, 310 141, 147, 879, 882, 84 L.Ed. 1124 (1940). Remedies area desirable another. antitrust example, Civil Rights Acts. areas.27 Surely caution although "in circumstances useful element plan," "its 'costs,' financial terms, render inadvisable." 3, supra. equally I.28 short, having gone beyond return prevailing generally throughout States. conformed every respect. That chose pull back part, preserving exists assuredly IV facially valid, nonetheless stated itself.29 Voters motivated purposes, chief schooling. considered extent authorized actually aggravating rather ameliorating problem. 1, Cal.App.3d, 655, 22 constitutionality another Proposition. gave private discrimination. agreed, deferring court. "armed knowledge facts concerning passage potential impact" "familiar milieu operate." 378, 1633. involving impact statewide election, conclusions court.30 23 Under Court, face determining motivating factor, "an 'important starting point.' " 274, 2293, quoting Arlington Heights Metropolitan Housing Dev. Corp., 429 252, 266, 555, 563, 50 450 (1977). 24 way purports effects accompanying stigma. schooling neutral. manifestly true where over 75% body composed groups minorities. nn. 16, removes means achieving education. cause. measures transportation.31 25 assume challenge Appeal's overwhelming electorate.32 received members races.33 text objectives. circumstances, dispute judgment impugn motives electorate. 26 Accordingly 27 Affirmed. BLACKMUN, whom BRENNAN joins, concurring. 29 join write separately address believe critical distinctions Washington Seattle 457, 3187, 896. 30 always distortions implications attempts achieve equal laws. Thus particularly pernicious classifications threaten involve self-government, drawn "just framework," 393, 562, (1969) (Harlan, J., concurring), unlikely principles. 31 followed inexorably considerations. electorate reallocated decisionmaking 'mak[e] difficult certain religious [than community] interest.' 470, 3195 (emphasis original), 395, 562 concurring). structure recognizing participate effectively society created, necessarily "relegated, fiat, basic second-class status." Plyler Doe, 457 202, 233, 2382, 2403, 72 786 (1982) (BLACKMUN, 32 my view, significantly case. create enforce; originate elsewhere—in legislature, subdivisions, constitution itself. When repealed, therefore rendered unenforceable courts, hardly restructure mechanism. mind working structural change much repealing invoke remedy. ruling theory seemingly mean statutory affirmative-action programs enactment lodged being removed entity. 33 California—the same "entity" place enforceable desegregate—have judicially unenforceable. "political mechanism used conscious legislation" peculiar disadvantageous treatment," 458, 3203 mechanisms enforced left entirely unaffected right—or, analogously, removal judiciary's right—" 'curtail[s] ordinarily minorities.' Supra, 486, 3203, Carolene Products Co., 304 144, 153, 4, 58 778, 783-784, 82 1234 (1938). 34 Because find distinguishable 35 MARSHALL, dissenting. 36 today addresses two ballot measures, initiative each admittedly curtail, eliminate, 896 (Seattle), concludes Washington's Initiative 350, prevents ordering meaning "it uses nature issue define structure, thus unique burdens minorities." Seattle, 3195. Inexplicably, simultaneously California's segregation, "having States." Ante, 542. fail how fundamental redefinition remove local boards, yet dissent uphold 37 understand fully today, adoption proper context. Nearly decades ago, unanimous declared "[t]he children separate physical facilities methods quality instruction several equal, deprives opportunities education denies due law." Jackson Pasadena District, 59 Cal.2d 876, 880, 606, 608-609, 382 878, 880-881 (1963). Recognizing "right opportunity consequences segregation" according cause isolation, declined engrafted 881, 609-610, 881-882. Instead, clearly "school [must] steps, insofar feasible, imbalance cause." 610, 882. 38 subsequently explained, "each district reflect composition whole." 302, 738, 28, 42 (1976) (Crawford ). Rather, sufficient authorities "take eliminate i.e., enrollment realistically isolate deprive integrated experience." 303, 739, 43 original). primary implementing lies boards. "[S]o long board initiates implements district, produce meaningful progress alleviation consequences, judiciary should [not] intervene 305-306, 741, 45. If, however, neglects refuses implement bring about end "the children." 307, intervention necessary, "may exercise broad equitable powers formulating supervising finds insure district." 742, 46. "once defaults task, devising remedial order, precluded plan." 48. 39 Like many protecting eradicate evils popular one. nearly since Jackson, restrain enforcing guarantee transfers assignments. shortly San Francisco voluntarily assignment, Legislature Code § 1009.5, Cal.Educ.Code Ann. currently codified 35350 (West 1978), "[n]o governing transported written permission parent guardian." Johnson, 937, 92 309, 479 669 (1971), interpreted students, parental consent, furnished district. Construing statute prohibit nonconsensual eradicating concluded, "exorcising method sole exclusive eliminating schools." 943, 311, 671. 40 very next year, opponents balance attempted eviscerate Jackson. 21, referendum 1972, shall, his creed, assigned attend particular school." Predictably, struck down "for set forth us Johnson." Santa Barbara 315, 324, 118 637, 645, 530 605, 613 (1975). 41 Finally, Proposition, like previous initiatives, deprived isolated schools," 671, transfer. Unlike accomplish objective, purport prevent predicated Therefore, presented saves infirmity objective. recitation obvious—that override guarantees—cannot work federally protected A. exhaustively principles control present inquiry. series precedents, exemplified Lee Nyquist, 318 F.Supp. 710 (W.D.N.Y.1970) (three-judge court), summarily aff'd, 935, 1618, 105 establish prohibits allocating "governmental nonneutrally, explicitly using kind 'places process' 'making works "nonneutral" reallocation decision. determination informed Seattle. transfer issues "new remote level government." 483, 3202. reaching conclusion, specifically affirmed three 44 First, argument "racial overtones" mention words "race" "integration." 471, "[n]either initiative's sponsors, Appeals difficulty perceiving settled 350." history surrounding adoption, "beyond ' "because of," merely spite upon' integration." Ibid., 279, 2296, Solicitor General's remarkable contention, pressed "busing integration peculiarly 'racial' all." 471-472, 3196. discounting value non-minority definitively "desegregation bottom inures purpose," bringing doctrine. 472, 45 Second, determined 350 unconstitutionally legislature After considerable virtually matters, including assignment. Those "surmount considerably higher hurdle comparable legislative action," 474, 3197, instead pursuing appeal government. Just interested enacting compelled gain electorate, along lines offends Our altered combat pursue petitioning enact legislature. occurred responsible policy harm effective form government empowered grant 46 implicitly reallocates immunized leaves intact guaranteed alter schools. B 47 lead depriving Despite I's apparent neutrality, dispute," 3195, concedes, "court-ordered excess prompted initiation probably I." 538, n.18 original).1 "minorities consider 'legislation interest,' sufficiently "racial" theHunter doctrine.2 48 doubt power. Prior enumerated 878 (1963), attaining two-stage procedure. community attempt convince comply If either unwilling unable carry duty, petition officials live up obligations. Busing order. 49 Whereas deny step procedure, eliminates fiat stage: compliance recalcitrant whole. Clearly, rules game changed attempting right.3 conceal unmistakable commitment 'more' requires." 3216. [anti-discrimination] violates Amendment," n.5, prior decisions. 51 repudiated drafted predecessors admitting Board's role establishment various actions. constitutionally withdraw own mea culpa, acted undo operative regulations affecting pupils aspects management affairs." 413, 2772 added). time squarely situation entity rescinded policy. surprise conduct passed muster. 52 Hunter, (1967),4 times proposed constituted policy, alleged rescission accomplished taken initial action, resulted drastic alteration substantive falls latter category. To sure, remains ante, 535-536; see, McKinny Oxnard Union High Trustees, 79, 92-93, 181 549, 556, 642 460, 467 (1982). asserts "require people." 540. violations, "final authority" make regarding premised ultimate process. context springs source underlying authorization: "courts relief" Swann Charlotte-Mecklenburg 1267, 1283, 554 (1971); ("a segregation"). assuming traced people," majority's people" confer plainly inconsistent InHunter 392, 561, Akron, Ohio, undoubtedly retained legislation. away offended "is borders." 477, 3199. referendum, therefore, immunize review. SeeLucas Colorado General Assembly, 377 713, 736-737, 1459, 1473-1474, 632 54 Reitman, independent themselves. drastically patently obvious litigation.5 enormous barrier enjoyment rights, path who law. precedents demonstrate that, absent interest, respondents demonstrated, stand.6 55 cloak mantle result. might seem "paradoxical" Members adopts wording it, paradox specious. Supremacy Clause, precisely legal contained reference lesson State, protection. avenues open conceivably legislation, process, justify decisionmaking. 56 occurs process—the major arena ensure interest." 563 Certainly, distinguished ground concerned power, redistributes inherent tailor recognized, too often practicable avenue grievances." NAACP Button, 371 415, 430, 83 328, 336, 405 377, 1632 (invalidating discriminate, discriminate grounds, now embodied charter, immune legislative, executive, regulation government") wonder, amply illustrates, whatever towards elimination come courts. denying access branch willing meaningfully, far worse unpopular unavailable unresponsive paraphrase, "[i]t surely excessively formal procedural revisions [and ] imposed selective allocation worked [Proposition I] erect obstacles." 475, 17, 17. 57 somehow enactments reached precedents. product intent. factual record issue, potentially legitimate legislation's preamble invidious 509 564, "[d]etermining factor demands sensitive inquiry circumstantial direct evidence available." assert combined opposition cited 548-551, indicates presence Brief 64-96. despite conducted allegations haste banner "neighborhood affirms made. blind allegiance conclusory statements lower forbidden decisions.7 sense "better" Seattle.8 generosity, allowed steadfastly maintained color line schoolhouse door continuing desegregate. At time, effective—the judiciary. name "ability experiment," 535, allows placement counter centuries prejudice. justified consistent citizens dissent. 1980 650,000 711 square miles. 1968 trial, 53.6% white, 22.6% black, 20% Hispanic, 3.8% Asian other. radically: 23.7% 23.3% 45.3% 7.7% 642, 501 adequately defendant nature. explain, rest [Jackson Dist., (1963) 'regardless cause.' 285, 726, 30. controlling: "In focusing ignores significant decisions, authoritatively 729-730, 33-34. stating general guide discussed 'busing' question: "While critics sometimes obscure emphasized "busing" tool utilized satisfy district's field. [I]n instances 743, 47. speed takes segregation," id., 305, 45, "a properly continues meet obligations." approximately 40,000 fourth eighth grades. Some bused distances daily round-trip bus rides four hours. 30,000 students. Respondent Bustop, Inc., unsuccessfully sought stay Inc. 439 1380, 40, 88 (1978) (REHNQUIST, chambers); 1384, 44, (POWELL, chambers). following two-thirds vote house Cal.Const., Art. 18, 1. Senate 6, Assembly 62 favored 2,433,312 (68.6%) 1,112,923 (31.4%). counties 79 80 assembly districts. Secretary Statement Vote, Election 3-4, 43-49. added lengthy proviso 7(a), provides, part: "(a) person life, liberty, laws; provided, nothing herein elsewhere obligations responsibilities exceed subdivision "Nothing commencing date amended. amending subdivision, declare serve interests, making limited resources prospectively education, maximizing health safety pupils, enhancing parents harmony tranquility preventing waste scarce fuel resources, environment." effort pending appeal. 448 1343, 101 65 1166 (1980) "When reviewed correct segregative found. thrust passive maintenance widespread residential amounted overcome population movements." 645-646, 503. "vested right" 655-656, 509-510. advance claim. 1981, directed terminated April 20, 1981. reassigned given option returning According respondent 7,000 took 4,300 10. refused enjoin termination Central temporary restraining 513 717. "fair chance" demonstrated. 720. day Ninth Circuit. 650 F.2d 1004 remand motion dismiss. certified interlocutory 10, 4. September new, argues doing assigning 10-18. reach contention. differs enacted, releases Constitutional cause, divests transportation." 566, limits statutes Cf. Brown Califano, 201 U.S.App.D.C. 235, 244, 627 1221, 1230 (legislation agency "effective desegregation" legislation). "[I]t apparatus state, state's case." invalidated face, reality law's minority." 560. distortion facial neutrality. elements missing. infra. offend Ed., 1282, (1971) ("Absent All assign nearest homes"). U.S.C. 1701: Congress declares that—(1) enrolled entitled regard sex, origin; assignments." white County, Spanish origin, Dept. Commerce, Census Population Housing, California, Advance Reports (Mar.1981). Davis, 426 229, 238-248, 96 2040, 2046-2052, 597 (1976); 265, (1977); 1333, applies neutrally "pupil transportation" general. so, court-ordered desegregating Ed. 443 531, 2976, ("Racial imbalance, per se violation, resolutions proposing Amendment"). "we Amendment." 5. pieces discrimination: "Here discriminations. Section intended authorize, market." 380-381, 1634. Of course, disadvantage reason. (1967). Palmer Thompson, 403 217, 228, 1940, 1946, 438 ("To facility service, opened, 'locks in' sponsor dropped discourage expansion enlargement needed services run") (BURGER, C. concurring); 1641 ("Opponents position defeated because, unrepealable") dissenting). dissenting 1641, Harlan remarked need flexibility "delicate troublesome relations." He noted: area, fraught human sensibilities frailties ones. drawing requires understanding, patience, compromise, best done legislatures field wide referendum." 395-396, 1641. Tr. Oral Arg. 6. 7-8 ("The freedom simply, argue, remedy"). Here, treats Negro Jew gentile identical manner," pass restricts respondents—as brief—take provision. constitution" go areas others. executive branch" 1221 (upholding agency, busing). contains purpose: "[T]he fuel, 253, 2054 deference pays indeed, characterizes vary contexts.") (STEVENS, Department Health, Welfare (HEW) "to student's home," 2000d, unconstitutional. HEW encourage means, untouched. HEW's effect. And, inquire motivation: "Absent motivation unnecessary, undesirable." U.S.App.D.C., 248, F.2d, (footnote omitted). concurring) ("It unrealistic invalidate otherwise improper motive deliberation participant conscripting clerics atheist voted it"). 73.9% County "minority" population—including origin—of 50%. 3. smallest percentage Humboldt Marin Counties all-white composition. types prohibited conclusion: "Neither by" Indeed response certiorari, addressing "one narrow area: remedy." Opposition 9. irrelevant "benefits neutral," asserts. 554; 537. 3196, whites initiative, There practical 669, 671 noted, "bus integral systems, truly devised reliance it." North Carolina Swann, 43, 46, 1284, 1286, 586 respecting Presumably, design "pairing" "clustering" "busing." "constitutionally suspect" "place[d] relieving student." 160. Consequently, program integrate community's 473, precludes measure, granting resident absolute sell rent whomever he she chooses. authorization express terms application person. 7(a). notes, states "people interests," including, inter alia, "making efficient resources," "health safety" "harmony tranquility," "protecting 533, These justifications, meritorious, insufficient sustain "necessary, rationally related, accomplishment permissible policy." goes saying self-serving necessity suffice fulfill burden. 29-31, (rejecting similar list justifications establishing classification). event, [respondents] failed show purpose[s] impute [Proposition] methods, distinctions." F.Supp., Parenthetically, interesting allegedly interest schools" referred appears nowhere justifications. supposed justification surprising Proposition's ban "assignment" "neighborhood." misplaced. How "knowledge 1633, ever least hinder [the] [the State] Constitution." 490, 3205,

Category: 1