NAACP v. California

Ninth Circuit

NAACP v. California

711 F.2d 121

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 31, 1983

DocketNo. 81-4216

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 711 F.2d 121 (NAACP v. California) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

NAACP v. California, 711 F.2d 121 (9th Cir. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff-Appellants’ petition for rehearing is denied. Plaintiff-Appellants’ petition for “Publication of Opinion” is granted to the extent of the publication of this order. The below decision which was filed May 31, 1983 is hereby ordered published.

Appellants appeal the dismissal of their suit for declaratory and injunctive relief. Appellants allege that Proposition I, an amendment to the California constitution that limits the use of busing to remedy segregation resulting from de jure acts, violates the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment. Appellants sought a declaration that Proposition I is unconstitutional and an order enjoining the defendants state officials and state courts from implementing or enforcing its provisions.

We are foreclosed by Crawford v. Los Angeles Board of Education, — U.S. —, 102 S.Ct. 3211, 73 L.Ed.2d 948 (1982), from granting the relief requested. Hence, [122]*122we affirm the dismissal solely on that ground.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Plaintiff-Appellants’ petition for rehearing is denied. Plaintiff-Appellants’ petition for “Publication of Opinion” is granted to the extent of the publication of this order. The below decision which was filed May 31, 1983 is hereby ordered published.

Appellants appeal the dismissal of their suit for declaratory and injunctive relief. Appellants allege that Proposition I, an amendment to the California constitution that limits the use of busing to remedy segregation resulting from de jure acts, violates the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment. Appellants sought a declaration that Proposition I is unconstitutional and an order enjoining the defendants state officials and state courts from implementing or enforcing its provisions.

We are foreclosed by Crawford v. Los Angeles Board of Education, — U.S. —, 102 S.Ct. 3211, 73 L.Ed.2d 948 (1982), from granting the relief requested. Hence, [122]*122we affirm the dismissal solely on that ground.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

711 F.2d 121, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/naacp-v-california-ca9-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack