O N C I N I
O N A L D
E T W I N
A C Y
, P . C
2 5 2 5 E a s t B r o a d w a y B l v d . , S u i t e 2 0 0 T u c s o n , A Z 8 5 7 1 6 - 5 3 0 0
INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The purpose of a desegregation case is to restore a segregated school system tounitary status and to return control of the district to its elected officials.
Freeman v. Pitts
,503 U.S. 467, 489, 112 S. Ct. 1430, 1445 (1992). In order to be declared unitary, a schooldistrict must demonstrate that it has eliminated the vestiges of the segregated system, that ithas complied in good faith with any court orders of desegregation and that it hasdemonstrated its good faith commitment to the operation of a non-discriminatory schoolsystem.
at 492, 112 S.Ct. at 1446,
Bd. of Educ. Of Oklahoma City v.
, 498U.S. 237, 249-250, 111 S.Ct. 630, 637-638 (1991).From August 31, 1978 through December 19, 2009, Tucson Unified School District(the “District”) operated pursuant to a Stipulation of Settlement that was agreed to by theFisher Plaintiffs, the Mendoza Plaintiffs, the United States Department of Justice and theDistrict (collectively, the “Parties”), and approved by the Court on August 31, 1978. InDecember 2009, the United States District Court declared the District unitary and dismissedthis lawsuit. The Fisher and Mendoza Plaintiffs appealed that ruling, and on July 19, 2011,the Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court and remanded this case for furtherproceedings. The Ninth Circuit ruled that the District must demonstrate that it hadeliminated the vestiges of segregation as to each of the
factors (student assignment,faculty assignment, facilities, extracurricular activities and transportation) and that it haddemonstrated its good faith intent to the operation of a desegregated school system. Citing
, the Ninth Circuit acknowledged that the District Court could find that
Green v. School Board of New Kent County
, 391 U.S. 430, 88 S.Ct. 1689 (1968)
Case 4:74-cv-00090-DCB Document 1407 Filed 11/09/12 Page 3 of 26