• Free Speech & Social Media
      • Privacy & Surveillance
      • Transparency & Democracy
    • Litigation
    • Research
    • Policy
      • Events
      • Reading Rooms
      • Blog
      • Video
      • Podcasts
      • The Knight Institute
      • Board
      • Staff
      • Visiting Scholars
      • Work With Us
      • Support Us
      • Contact
      • Press Room

Reading Room Document

Constitutionality of Legislation Limiting the Remedial Powers of the Inferior Federal Courts in School Desegregation Litigation

Proposed legislative restriction on the power of the inferior federal courts to order busing remedies in school desegregation litigation cannot be justified as an exercise of congressional power to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment, if such a restriction would prevent a court from fully remedying a constitutional violation. Proposed legislation can be justified as an exercise of congressional power under Article III, § 1 of the Constitution, which gives Congress very broad power to control the jurisdiction of the inferior federal courts. The bill does not usurp the judicial function by depriving the lower courts of power to hear desegregation cases and to impose remedies which do not involve busing, nor does it instruct the lower courts how to decide issues of fact in pending cases, or require reversal of any outstanding court order. The bill's provision prohibiting the Department of Justice from using appropriated funds to bring or maintain an action to require busing is constitutional despite the limitations that it would impose on the Executive's discretion, since it does not preclude the Department from fulfilling its statutory obligation to enforce the law through seeking other effective remedies or objecting to inadequate desegregation plans. Both the limitation on courts and on the Department of Justice should be upheld if challenged under the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, since neither limitation creates a racial classification nor evidences a discriminatory purpose. The OLC does not provide release dates for its opinions, so the release date listed is the date on which the opinion was authored. The original opinion is available at www.justice.gov/file/22871/download.

May 6, 1982

The OLC's Opinions

Opinions published by the OLC, including those released in response to our FOIA lawsuit

Issues

Free Speech & Social Media

Free Speech & Social Media

Featured

Knight Institute Says Visa Revocations Over Charlie Kirk Criticism Are Unconstitutional

     

Privacy & Surveillance

Privacy & Surveillance

Featured

Appeals Court Revives Journalists’ Case Against Spyware Manufacturer NSO Group

Spyware manufacturers should be held accountable in U.S. courts for actions violating U.S. law, Knight Institute says

Transparency & Democracy

Transparency & Democracy

Featured

Knight Institute Seeks Immediate Release of Trump Administration Agreements with Major Law Firms

 Says records are key to public’s understanding of administration’s vindictive campaign against political opponents

Events

The Science of Chilling Effects

Online

The Science of Chilling Effects

Learn More

Sign up for news about First Amendment events, research, and litigation

  • Issues

    • Free Speech & Social Media
    • Privacy & Surveillance
    • Transparency & Democracy
  • Litigation
  • Research
  • Policy
  • Public Education

    • Events
    • Reading Rooms
    • Blog
    • Video
    • Podcasts
  • About
  • Press Room
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy

© 2021 Knight First Amendment Institute. Design by Point Five. Development by Tierra Innovation. Icons by Leandro Castelao.

2020 Webby Award Winner for Law Website