by The Commission : for sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S.Govt. Print. Off. in Washington .
Written in English
|Contributions||Routh, Frederick B., Waldo, Everett A., Hurley, Carol-Lee., United States Commission on Civil Rights.|
|LC Classifications||KF4155.A2 M54|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||vi, 152 p. :|
|Number of Pages||152|
|LC Control Number||75603524|
Get this from a library! Milliken v. Bradley--the implications for metropolitan desegregation: conference before the United States Commission on Civil Rights.. [Frederick B Routh; Everett A Waldo; Carol-Lee Hurley; United States Commission on Civil Rights.;]. Six papers from a variety of related disciplines discuss basic issues involved in Milliken vs Bradley, the papers reflecting the following areas: legal implications, political science perspectives, educational implications, housing implications, economic implications, and implications for desegregation . Six papers from a variety of related disciplines discuss basic issues involved in Milliken vs Bradley, the papers reflecting the following areas: legal implications, political science perspectives, educational implications, housing implications, economic implications, and implications for desegregation centers. Scholars and authorities comment on each of the by: 1. Full text of "ERIC ED Milliken vs. Bradley: The Implications for Metropolitan ence Before the United States Commission on Civil Rights." See other formats.
Syllabus. After this Court in Milliken v. Bradley, U.S. , 94 , 41 2d (Milliken I), determined that an interdistrict remedy for de jure segregation in the Detroit school system exceeded the constitutional violation, and remanded the case for formulation of a decree, the District Court promptly ordered submission of desegregation plans limited to the Detroit school system. William G. MILLIKEN, Governor of Michigan, et al., Petitioners, v. Ronald BRADLEY and Richard Bradley, by their mother and next friend, VerdaBradley, et al. ALLEN PARK PUBLIC SCHOOLS et al., Petitioners, v. , as the date for the filing of briefs on the legal propriety of a 'metropolitan' plan of desegregation and, accordingly. ference, "Milliken v. Bradley. The Implications` for Metropolitan Desegregation." This con-ference report is divided into six major sections, one for each of the subjects covered. Each sec. *tion contains the pertinent paper, prepared and circulated in advance,.folltiwed by the portion of. B]ADLEY: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR METROPOLITAN DESEGREGATION (Conference, Nov. 9, ); Symposium-Milliken v. Bradley and the Future of Urban School Desegregation, 21 WAYNE L. REv. (). Taylor takes the position that in the long run metropolitan desegregation can be effectively achieved only by concentrating on govern-.
Summary of Milliken v. Bradley After reviewing the case, the District Court ruled that the Detroit Board of Education submit desegregation plans for the Detroit-area schools only. The court also ordered the state to submit desegregation plans for a three-county metropolitan area, excluding 85 outlying school districts in the three. But, for many, that brightness dimmed considerably following the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Milliken v. Bradley (). While the literature on Brown is voluminous, Joyce Baugh's measured and insightful study offers the only available book-length analysis of Milliken, the first major desegregation case to originate outside the s: 2. In a new book, “When the Fences Come Down: Twenty-First-Century Lessons from Metropolitan School Desegregation,” Virginia Commonwealth University professor Genevieve Siegel-Hawley, Ph.D., explores what happens when communities take a regional approach to addressing persistent school segregation rather than focusing only on improving schools by raising academic standards, holding teachers. Milliken v. Bradley, U.S. (), was an important United States Supreme Court case dealing with the planned forced busing of public school students across district lines among 53 school districts in metropolitan Detroit. It concerned the plans to integrate public schools in the United States in the aftermath of the Brown v.