Fisher v. Tucson Unified School District
652 F.3d 1131
9th Cir.2011Background
- In 1974, African American and Mexican American students sued the Tucson Unified School District for segregation and discrimination in a desegregation context.
- A 1978 settlement decree established federal court oversight to remedy past discrimination and required annual reporting by the District.
- After decades under the decree, the district court found the District not in good faith but nonetheless terminated jurisdiction, declaring unitary status.
- The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding continued federal supervision required where good faith and vestiges of de jure discrimination had not been eliminated.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with unitary-status standards, including good-faith compliance and vestiges elimination across Green factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tucson achieved unitary status. | Fisher/Mendoza: failed good faith; vestiges persist. | TUSD: post-unitary plan and data show progress toward unitary status. | Remanded to determine good-faith compliance and vestiges elimination. |
| Whether the district court erred in terminating federal jurisdiction. | Court should retain jurisdiction until good faith and vestiges are eliminated. | After plan adoption, jurisdiction dissolution appropriate. | Incorrect; jurisdiction must continue until good-faith compliance and vestiges are demonstrably eliminated. |
| What standard governs partial withdrawal of supervision under unitary-status doctrine. | Complete and continued oversight needed where any area lacks compliance. | Partial withdrawal could occur where areas are in compliance. | Court retains discretion to partial withdrawal; remand to apply appropriate standard. |
| Are Green factors (beyond student assignment) properly evaluated for good-faith and vestiges. | District failed to monitor and address multiple Green factors. | Adequate evidence of progress in several factors supports unitary status in some areas. | Lower court erred; need full, correct application of Green-factor standards on remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. County School Bd. of New Kent Cnty., Va., 391 U.S. 430 (1968) (unitary status and continuing federal oversight when vestiges persist)
- Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70 (1995) (good-faith compliance and vestiges elimination as prerequisites to ending oversight)
- Freeman v. Pitts, 503 U.S. 467 (1992) (good-faith compliance evidence and pattern of lawful conduct)
- Dowell v. Bd. of Educ. of Okla. City Pub. Schs., 498 U.S. 237 (1991) (desegregation decree withdrawal only after remedial effects and time)
- Jenkins v. Missouri, 515 U.S. 70 (1995) (two-prong test: good faith and vestiges eliminated to extent practicable)
- Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 402 U.S. 1 (1971) (district court broad remedial authority in desegregation cases)
- Penick v. Columbus Bd. of Educ., 443 U.S. 449 (1979) (precedent on district court supervision and unitary status considerations)