San Diego Parents Challenge
Busing of Their Children,
in Carlin v. Board of Education,
as Intervenors in this Class Action

Crawford proceedings in September, 1981. For, now the burden would be placed upon Intervenors to show cause for concluding jurisdiction, as will be seen, over the objections of both the Carlin Plaintiffs and the Board.
 

Board and Plaintiffs Stipulate to Continuing Court Jurisdiction

In March, 1989 the Board proposed a stipulation, containing the above two provisions, objected to by Groundswell on April 29, 1989, as follows:

... In addition, the proposed Amended Final Order extends and enlarges the jurisdiction of the Court over School District Affairs in a manner contrary to Intervenors' long-standing positions and, we believe, to the evolving Supreme Court view on affirmative action.

In particular, Intervenors refer (1) to their support on September 16, 1981, of the District's motion to discharge the writ of mandate and (2) their objections to the following language in the Final Order re: Integration, filed May 21, 1985, which is restated on Page 12 in the proposed Amended Final Order, as follows: (restating Paragraph “1983-84 17” sanctioning racial balancing of classes and seats within classes).

Notwithstanding the objections, the stipulation by the other two parties was approved and the Amended Final Order re: Integration was signed and filed on May 4, 1989. The argument that the “evolving Supreme Court view on affirmative action” would support the objections was bolstered by indications that the high court would soon review orders which mandated busing in Oklahoma City and DeKalb County, Georgia.

The Groundswell parents had met the challenge of voicing their objections to busing before the Carlin Court. The author undertook to place parents' special opposition to busing indirectly before the justices by way of amici curiae briefs. The first brief, after garnering consents from the parties, was served and thereupon filed on May 11, 1990 in support of the successful petitioning school board in Board of Ed. of Oklahoma City v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237 (1990). Details concerning this brief are reported in Liberate Public Schools, pp. 48-52, and in Busing — Not Integration — Opposed, pp. 51-58.

The author next served and filed on May 1, 1991, the second amici brief
 

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

Crawford III 

Crawford v. Los Angeles Board of Education, 458 U.S. 527 (1982)
Los Angeles, California
 

Dowell 

Board of Ed. of Oklahoma City v. Dowell, 498 U.S. 237 (1990)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Enstrom: filed amici curiae brief
 

— Handbook: Challenge Two, pages 33 - 43 —