Ark. Code Ann. » Title 6 Chapter 23
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 6-23-106 (2026)

Impact on school desegregation efforts

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. The applicants for a public charter school, the local school district board of directors for the district in which a proposed public charter school would be located, and the authorizer shall carefully review the potential impact of an application for a public charter school on the efforts of a public school district or public school districts to comply with court orders and statutory obligations to create and maintain a unitary system of desegregated public schools.
  2. The authorizer shall attempt to measure the likely impact of a proposed public charter school on the efforts of public school districts to achieve and maintain a unitary system.
  3. The authorizer shall not approve any public charter school under this chapter or any other act or any combination of acts that hampers, delays, or in any manner negatively affects the desegregation efforts of a public school district or public school districts in this state.

History. Acts 1999, No. 890, § 15; 2005, No. 2005, § 4; 2007, No. 736, § 4; 2013, No. 509, § 2.

Amendments. The 2013 amendment, in (a), substituted “the local school board for the district” for “local school board” and “authorizer” for “State Board of Education”; and substituted “authorizer” for “state board” in (b) and (c).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2015–2015 · leading case: Heath Adkisson v. Blytheville Sch. Dist. 5, 800 F.3d 955 (8th Cir. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Heath Adkisson v. Blytheville Sch. Dist. 5, 800 F.3d 955 (8th Cir. 2015). “Although the District was one of the parties with the responsibility of "review[ing] the potential impact of an application for a public charter school on the efforts of a public school district or public school districts to comply with court orders," Ark. Code Ann. § 6-23-106…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.