20 U.S.C. § 1755

Additional priority of remedies after finding of de jure segregation

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 20 CasesGoogle Scholar

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after June 30, 1974 no court of the United States shall order the implementation of any plan to remedy a finding of de jure segregation which involves the transportation of students, unless the court first finds that all alternative remedies are inadequate.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1975–2008 · leading case: Bd. of Educ., Joliet Tp. v. Bd. of Educ., 897 N.E.2d 756 (Ill. 2008).
Bd. of Educ., Joliet Tp. v. Bd. of Educ., 897 N.E.2d 756 (Ill. 2008). “…use busing to remedy de jure segregation “unless the court first finds that all alternative remedies are inadequate.” 20 U.S.C. §1755 (2000).”
Evans v. Buchanan, 447 F. Supp. 982 (D. Del. 1978). “20 U.S.C. § 1755 ; see Morgan v. Kerrigan, supra, 401 F.”
Morgan v. Kerrigan, 401 F. Supp. 216 (D. Mass. 1975). “20 U.S.C. § 1755 . Mandatory transportation by chartered bus refers to the service that the School Department shall provide for students assigned to elementary schools which are more than 1 mile from home; for middle school students who live more than 1% miles; and for students…”
United States v. City of Yonkers, 888 F. Supp. 591 (S.D.N.Y. 1995). “” 20 U.S.C. § 1755 . The remedial plan that was devised ten years ago for the Yonkers school system, to which the State would become a party if found liable at this stage of the proceedings, utilizes, albeit to a minimal degree, mandatory busing.”
Bd. of Educ., Joliet Twp. High Sch. Dist. No. 204 v. Bd. of Educ., Lincoln Way Cmty. High Sch. Dist. No. 210 (Ill. 2008). “” 20 U.S.C. §1755 (2000). -24- district of such agency providing the appropriate grade level and type of education for such student; *** (e) the transfer by an educational agency, whether voluntary or otherwise, of a student from one school to another if the purpose and effect…”
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.