## Facts

- Black students and parents sued the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, alleging that student assignment policies continued to maintain racially segregated public schools in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- The school system had previously used neighborhood zoning, transfer mechanisms, and other limited measures that did not eliminate schools identifiable by race.
- After controlling Supreme Court desegregation decisions required affirmative conversion from a dual to a unitary system, the district court revisited the adequacy of existing remedies.
- Multiple desegregation proposals were presented, including competing Board plans, a federal agency plan, and a consultant’s “Finger Plan.”
- The court had earlier ordered implementation of a version of the Finger Plan; the court of appeals largely approved secondary-level relief but required further work on an effective elementary-school remedy.
- On remand, the district court conducted further proceedings, evaluated the competing plans’ projected racial composition, transportation demands, and effectiveness, and entered a comprehensive remedial order.
- The adopted remedy used student reassignment, school pairing/clustering, non-contiguous attendance zones, transportation, and faculty/staff reassignment to eliminate one-race schools to the extent practicable.

## Issues

1. Whether the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school system continued to operate an unconstitutional dual system despite prior post-segregation assignment plans.
2. What remedial measures a federal court may order to dismantle a dual system, including busing, non-contiguous zones, school pairings/clusters, and race-conscious assignment tools.
3. Whether administrative convenience, community opposition, or asserted “reasonableness” limits can justify a remedy that leaves racially identifiable schools in place.

## Decision

- The court found that the school system remained an unconstitutional dual system, reflected in persistent concentrations of Black students in overwhelmingly Black schools traceable to official policies and decisions.
- The court held that the Board had an affirmative duty to eliminate segregation and its effects throughout the system, not merely to end formal segregation rules.
- The court approved and ordered implementation of a modified Finger Plan as more effective than alternative proposals in dismantling racially identifiable schools.
- The court required extensive student reassignment across traditional neighborhood lines, including non-contiguous zoning and school pairings/clusters.
- The court authorized transportation as a permissible and necessary remedial tool where needed to achieve meaningful desegregation.
- The court ordered faculty and staff desegregation so that schools would not remain identifiable as “white” or “Black” based on personnel assignments.
- The court rejected arguments that “reasonableness,” inconvenience, or political concerns could override constitutional requirements.

## Legal Principles

- A school district that previously operated a legally enforced dual system bears an affirmative constitutional duty to eliminate segregation and its effects in student assignment, faculty assignment, and related policies.
- Persistent one-race or racially identifiable schools are strong evidence that a dual system has not been dismantled, particularly where patterns are linked to official actions such as school siting, zoning, and transfer rules.
- Federal courts possess broad equitable authority to order practical measures necessary to convert a dual system into a unitary system, including reassignment plans that cross neighborhood boundaries.
- Transportation may be required as part of an effective remedy; its permissibility turns on whether it is a reasonable means to correct constitutional violations.
- Race-conscious tools, including the use of racial composition data and targets as planning and evaluative baselines, may be used to craft and assess whether a remedy effectively eliminates racially identifiable schools; the objective is constitutional compliance rather than an abstract requirement of racial proportionality.
- Considerations of feasibility (distance, capacity, and administration) may inform the design of methods, but they cannot be used to preserve unconstitutional segregation.

## Conclusion

The district court concluded that Charlotte-Mecklenburg continued to operate a dual school system and ordered a comprehensive, systemwide desegregation remedy. It required student and faculty reassignment and authorized transportation, pairing/clustering, and non-contiguous zoning, holding that practical or political objections could not justify leaving racially identifiable schools intact.


Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Educ., 318 F. Supp. 786 (W.D.N.C. 1970)