ALEXIS I. Du PONT SCHOOL DISTRICT Et Al. v. EVANS Et Al.

Background

Seven suburban school districts near Wilmington, Delaware, asked a Justice to pause a lower-court judgment that ordered sweeping changes. The District Court had found interdistrict constitutional violations and ordered consolidation of 11 independent districts into one interim governing board. That board, to be appointed by the State Board of Education, would control student assignments, taxes, hiring, and curriculum. The plan would reassign students from two predominantly Black districts into nine predominantly white districts for nine years, and reassign white-district students to the Black districts for three years. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s remedy.

Reasoning

The Justice considered whether to stay the order while the full Court might later decide to review the case. He said the remedy is unusually drastic and that four Justices might want to consider the matter on the merits. Still, he was not convinced that four Justices would grant review now. He also weighed practical and equitable concerns: the consolidated system had been under the desegregation order since January 1978, and schools were due to open imminently. On balance, he concluded that disrupting the plan at this late stage would be too disruptive and denied the stay request.

Real world impact

As a result, the court-ordered consolidation and large-scale student reassignments were allowed to go forward. That means local school boards will temporarily lose independent control over tax, staffing, assignment, and curriculum decisions while the remedy is in effect. The Justice noted the denial of a stay does not decide the ultimate merits, and the parties may still seek Supreme Court review.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Brennan had earlier denied a similar stay and there were prior dissenting views when this case received a summary affirmance; Rehnquist explained his separate, more practical reasons for denial.