Parental Handbook
for Local Control of Education  /  Challenge One
  
31

San Diego Parents Challenge
Busing of Their Children,
in Carlin v. Board of Education,
as Real Parties In Interest,
Entitled to Intervene

Previous Next

urban schools found to have committed de jure segregation.

Crawford I in 1976 extended such affirmative action to California schools regardless of the cause of what was termed de facto segregation. The Carlin Plaintiffs sought to apply that ruling to the Groundswell parents who could now, as intervenors, present objections before busing affecting them could be ordered. Early Groundswell parental initiatives by petition and other lawful steps, set out in their amici curiae brief (see Appendix), established the special interest of non-class parents to orders adversely affecting their children in the Carlin class action. Next
 

 

 

 

 


Carlin  

Carlin v. Board of Education, San Diego Unified School District,
San Diego Superior Court No. 303800 (1967-1998)
San Diego, California
 

Crawford I 

Crawford v. Board of Education, 17 Cal.3d 280 (1976)
[related to BustopBoard of Ed., etc.]
Los Angeles, California
 

         

Handbook: Challenge One, pages 23 - 31 —

Previous Next
  

Parental Handbook
For Parents Dedicated to Local Control
of Public Education of Children
According to the Constitution
by Elmer Enstrom, Jr.
Contents
Challenges of the 30-year Carlin affirmative action lawsuit:
an exemplar of citizens reasserting Constitutional rights.
  
© 1998-2006, 2013 Enstrom Foundation www.EnstromFoundation.org Bookmark and Share