Metropolitan County Board of Education v. Kelley No. A-144
Headline: Denies Nashville school board’s request to lift an appeals-court pause, keeping a new April 17 desegregation plan from taking effect and delaying changes that would affect dozens of local schools.
Holding:
- Keeps the April 17 desegregation changes from taking effect for now.
- Delays immediate changes affecting 21 elementary, 6 middle, and 3 high schools.
- Postpones impact on the permanent plan scheduled to begin in 1984.
Summary
Background
A school board in Nashville asked Justice Stevens to lift a stay (an appeals-court pause) so a district court’s April 17 order changing the local school desegregation plan could go into effect. The April 17 order substantially modified the prior desegregation arrangement in Davidson County. The plaintiffs appealed that order, and an appeals court entered a stay on August 19, 1981. The board argued the stay would cause expense and inconvenience because the interim plan would immediately affect 21 elementary schools, 6 middle schools, and 3 high schools and would influence a permanent plan set to begin in 1984.
Reasoning
Justice Stevens decided he had the power to lift the appeals-court pause but chose not to. He agreed with the appeals court that the changes were sufficiently important to deserve review before being put into effect. He accepted the appeals court’s view that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their appeal. Stevens reasoned that allowing the plan to start now and possibly be changed later would create more disruption than keeping the pause while the appeal is decided. He also noted the appeals court’s greater familiarity with the case and the short time available to review the papers.
Real world impact
The practical effect is that the district court’s April 17 changes remain paused for now. Implementation affecting dozens of schools and the scheduled 1984 plan is delayed until the appeals process runs its course. This is an interim, procedural ruling and the outcome could change after full appellate review.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?