Legal Document

402 U.S. 47 91 Supreme Court Reporter 1292 28 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 590 Mrs. Robert Lee MOORE et al., Appellants,v.CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCATION al. Number 444. Argued Oct. 13, 1970. Decided April 20, 1971. Syllabus Since both parties in this section challenging a school desegregation plan seek the same result, viz., holding that North Carolina's Anti-Busing Law is constitutional, there no Article III case or controversy. Additionally, on facts of case, direct appeal to lies under Code KF62 § 1253. 312 F.Supp. 503, dismissed for lack jurisdiction. Whiteford S. Blakeney, Charlotte, N.C., Moore and others. William Judge Waggoner, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board Education PER CURIAM. 1 Appellants review decision District Western Carolina declaring portion anti-busing statute unconstitutional, enjoining its enforcement. It companion 498, State versus Swann, 43, 1284, 586. We postponed question jurisdiction, 400 803, 11, 27 34 (1970), after hearing merits we now dismiss 2 At argued three-judge court anti- busing law was constitutional urged order adopting Finger should be set aside. are thus confronted with anomaly litigants desire precisely namely constitutional. There is, therefore, controversy within meaning Constitution. Muskrat States, 219 346, 31 250, 55 L.Ed. 246 (1911). since neither party sought an injunction restrain state officer from enforcing alleged 2281, not 'any civil action, suit proceeding required * heard by district three judges,' 1253, hence available. 3 Dismissed.

Classification Label: 8