Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 611 F.2d 1239 - Spangler v. Pasadena City Board of Education

Spangler v. Pasadena City Board of Education’s Empirical Analysis

611 F.2d 1239 · 1979

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
June 2014
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2014 · most notably Board of Education of Oklahoma City Public Schools Independent School District No 89 Oklahoma County Oklahoma v. L Dowell (1991), Freeman v. Pitts (1992)

26 federal appellate · 3 district ·

23019791980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 20 U.S.C. § 1701 (§ 202 of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) · 20 U.S.C. § 1705 · 20 U.S.C. § 1718

Relies on Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al. · Washington v. Davis · Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'not extend beyond the time required to remedy the effects of past intentional discrimination.'”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he Supreme Court has emphasized that when a large percentage of minority students in a neighborhood school results from housing patterns for which school authorities are not responsible, the school board may not be charged with unconstitutional discrimination if a racially neutral assignment method is adopted.... From the standpoint of racial balance in pupil assignments, compliance with the [court's desegregation plan] for nine years is sufficient in this case, given the nature and degree of the initial violation, to cure the effects of previous improper assignment policies.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Adopting a student assignment method different from the [court's plan] may have the foreseeable effect of increasing racial imbalance in the Pasadena schools. This fact is relevant in determining whether a plan was adopted as a result of invidious intent, but other factors must also be examined.... The fact that the Board has explored assignment alternatives which may increase racial imbalance provides little support for the conclusion ... that the proposal, if adopted, would result from constitutionally infirm motives.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.