Who measures the Chancellor's foot? The inherent remedial authority of the federal courts

California Law Review

Volumn 84, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 1121-

  Yoo, John Choon ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042221208     PISSN: 00081221     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3480990     Document Type: Article

References (3)

1. 115 S. Ct. 2038, 2051 (1995) (holding that a district court's desegregation orders exceeded its remedial authority).
2. 349 U.S. 294, 301 (1955) (ordering desegregation of public schools with "all deliberate speed"). Brown II itself implemented the earlier finding, in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (Brown I), that segregation was unconstitutional.
3. See, e.g., Milliken v. Bradley, 433 U.S. 267, 288-90 (1977) (Milliken II) (holding that a desegregation remedy may include remedial or compensatory education programs paid for by the state); Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1, 27-29 (1971) (holding that courts may reassign students to remedy past de jure segregation); United States v. Montgomery County Bd. of Educ., 395 U.S. 225, 232-34 (1969) (holding that desegregation may occur according to mathematical ratios).