Justices Clear Way for L.A. School Desegregation Suit : Anti-Black Bias Since 1969 Alleged

The Supreme Court cleared the way today for the resumption of the long legal fight over school desegregation in Los Angeles, ruling that lawyers for the NAACP can go to trial in federal court to try to prove that the city school district has unlawfully discriminated against black students since 1969.

In a brief order, the justices let stand a ruling last December by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco permitting the NAACP to pursue its case in federal court, even though similar issues were litigated in state court proceedings that began in 1963 and ended in 1981.

According to school officials, the cost to the district of legal proceedings and court-ordered desegregation plans over that period exceeded $910 million.

At issue in federal court will be whether the Los Angeles Unified School District, through its policies and actions, intentionally segregated students after May 2, 1969--the date the trial proceedings in state court ended.

Mandatory Busing Possible

If the NAACP wins in a federal trial, the court could order mandatory busing--a system that was ended in 1981 after state courts upheld Proposition 1, the so-called “anti-busing” initiative. That initiative, passed in 1979, bars state courts from ordering mandatory pupil reassignment and transportation, except where there is a violation of federal law.

The initiative would not bar court-ordered busing if the federal court found the district in violation of the equal-protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

But city school officials today minimized the prospect of a resumption of any mandatory busing program, pointing out that of the district’s 565,000 students, less than 20% are Anglos--compared to 56% in 1969. About 40,000 pupils participate in a voluntary busing plan.

“The district is now 81% minority,” said Associate Supt. Jerry F. Halverson, counsel for the Board of Education. “I think it would be very hard to establish any kind of busing program that would be meaningful.”

Lawyers Express Doubt

The district’s lawyers also expressed doubt that the NAACP could show that school policies after 1969--involving pupil assignment, boundary-drawing and similar factors--were intended to produce racial segregation. That was a period when the case was in state court and school district actions were under close court scrutiny.

Attorney’s Reaction

“I don’t see how the district can ever be found guilty of de jure segregation (segregation sanctioned by law) in this period of time,” said G. William Shea, an attorney for the district. “Everything that was done by the district then was subject to court review.”

Nonetheless, lawyers for the six branches of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People involved in the action predicted that they would prevail in a federal court trial. “I am confident we’ll win,” said

The NAACP did not give details of what the group would seek if the federal court rules in its favor, but it did acknowledge that it might seek a desegregation plan that would include other school districts besides Los Angeles.

Also, because state authorities have been included as defendants in the case along with the district, it is possible that the NAACP would seek substantial financial aid from the state to help support a desegregation program for Los Angeles.

The case is expected to go to trial before U.S. District Judge A. Wallace Tashima by next spring or summer.