Case: U.S. v. Desoto Parish School Board

5:67-cv-12589 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

Filed Date: Jan. 11, 1967

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On January 11, 1967, the U.S. Department of Justice brought this school desegregation case in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. The Department of Justice sued to enjoin the operation of a segregated school system in rural Desoto Parish, Louisiana. In its early stages, this case was litigated largely in consolidated hearings involving 29 parishes in the Western District of Louisiana. This case was originally heard by Judge Benjamin C. Dawkins Jr. The case was first s…

On January 11, 1967, the U.S. Department of Justice brought this school desegregation case in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. The Department of Justice sued to enjoin the operation of a segregated school system in rural Desoto Parish, Louisiana. In its early stages, this case was litigated largely in consolidated hearings involving 29 parishes in the Western District of Louisiana. This case was originally heard by Judge Benjamin C. Dawkins Jr.

The case was first stayed pending the Fifth Circuit's decision in U.S. v. Jefferson County Bd. of Educ., 380 F.2d 385 (1967). On March 29, 1967 the Fifth Court decided Jefferson, ruling that school boards have an affirmative duty to bring about integrated, unitary school systems as opposed to merely providing an opportunity for Black students to attend all-White schools. The court's decision thus rejected some school boards' attempt to distinguish between “integration” and “desegregation.” 

Subsequently, the District Court approved a "freedom of choice" desegregation plan, in which students could in theory select which school to attend but in reality resulted in very little demographic change. As a result, the plaintiffs appealed. However, in Green v. County School Board of New Kent County, the Supreme Court ruled that a freedom of choice plan in Virginia was constitutionally inadequate for the purposes of school desegregation. 391 U.S. 430 (1968). Thus, the Fifth Circuit on August 20, 1968, remanded a large set of consolidated cases from various U.S. District Courts for reconsideration of whether "freedom of choice" plans were sufficient in light of the higher burden school districts face after Green. Adams v. Mathews, 403 F.2d 181 (1968).

On remand, on November 14, 1968, a three-judge panel in the district court again approved a freedom of choice plan in this and 28 other cases, all consolidated as Conley v. Lake Charles School Bd., 293 F. Supp. 84 (W.D. La. 1968), On appeal, on May 28, 1969, the Court of Appeals finally ruled for all the relevant cases, including this one, that “freedom of choice” plans were inadequate to achieve desegregation of public schools. Hall v. St. Helena Parish School Bd., 417 F.2d 801 (1969).

On August 4, 1969, the District Court approved a three-year plan submitted by the School Board. The plan assigned students to schools under one of three arrangements. Students could be assigned geographically, according to the bus they rode, or by providing their own transportation if they lived outside a zoned area. On January 14, 1970, Fifth Circuit ordered the plan to be modified to compel the school board to complete desegregation by February 1, 1970, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Carter v. West Feliciana Parish School Board, 396 U.S. 290 (1970), which reversed a Fifth Circuit case that allowed school districts to defer integration plans beyond February 1, 1970.

The Department of Justice filed a broad motion for further relief in 1975, but the district court only granted partial relief with regard to the student transportation system. On appeal, in 1978, the Fifth Circuit granted the broad relief that the Department of Justice sought but that the district court denied. Specifically, the Fifth Circuit granted relief with respect to student and faculty assignment. 574 F.2d 804. The Supreme Court denied review. 439 U.S. 982 (1978).

The docket was quiet until 2007, when the parties moved for entry of a new consent decree with res. The district court approved that decree on February 5, 2007. The decree adjusted their student transfer policy so that it would not interfere with the existing desegregation order. After granting multiple time extensions, the District Court entered a superseding decree on December 14, 2011, that finalized the student transfer policy. In 2014, the District Court granted a motion to modify the school attendance zone boundaries.

The School Board filed ten additional status reports since 2014 as of May 2019. The most recent report was filed by the defendant on April 6, 2021; included student enrollment, transfer, and faculty data. The case is ongoing.

Summary Authors

Alaael-Deen Shilleh (4/30/2017)

Sichun Liu (5/31/2019)

John Duffield (8/9/2021)

Related Cases

Related School Desegregation Cases in the Western District of Louisiana, Western District of Louisiana (1964)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5345890/parties/united-states-v-desoto-parish-school/


Judge(s)

Ainsworth, Robert Andrew Jr. (Louisiana)

Bell, Griffin Boyette (Georgia)

Brennan, William Joseph Jr. (District of Columbia)

Brown, John Robert (Louisiana)

Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorney for Defendant

Blanchard, John Richard (Louisiana)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

5:67-cv-12589

Docket

United States of America v. DeSoto Parish School

April 6, 2021

April 6, 2021

Docket

67-23345

67-23116

[Order]

United States of America v. Jefferson County Board of Education

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

March 29, 1967

March 29, 1967

Order/Opinion

380 F.2d 385

68-26501

68-26544

68-26452

[Order]

Adams v. Mathews

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Aug. 20, 1968

Aug. 20, 1968

Order/Opinion

403 F.2d 181

69-15556

69-02921

[Order]

Hall v. St. Helena Parish School Board

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

May 28, 1969

May 28, 1969

Order/Opinion

417 F.2d 801

09981

12924

[Order]

Conley v. Lake Charles School Board

May 28, 1969

May 28, 1969

Order/Opinion

293 F.Supp. 84

69-26285

69-27983

[Order]

Singleton v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Dec. 1, 1969

Dec. 1, 1969

Order/Opinion

419 F.2d 1211

70-28788

[Order]

United States of America v. Desoto Parish School Board

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Jan. 14, 1970

Jan. 14, 1970

Order/Opinion

420 F.2d 380

76-03471

[Order]

United States of America v. Desoto Parish School Board

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

June 2, 1978

June 2, 1978

Order/Opinion

574 F.2d 804

78-00458

Memorandum for the United States in Opposition

De Soto Parish School Board v. United States of America

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 27, 1978

Oct. 27, 1978

Pleading / Motion / Brief
5

5:67-cv-12589

Consent Decree

United States of America v. Desoto Parish School Board

Feb. 5, 2007

Feb. 5, 2007

Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5345890/united-states-v-desoto-parish-school/

Last updated June 1, 2026, 10:45 p.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
March 21, 2002

Judge F A Little, Jr added pursuant to entry on paper docket sheet of 3/21/02. Judge Tom Stagg no longer assigned to case. (crt,Crawford, A) (Entered: 03/16/2006)

PACER
March 21, 2002

Add and Terminate Judges

1 March 15, 2006

Remark

RECAP
2 March 15, 2006

Remark

RECAP
3 Oct. 16, 2006

Remark

RECAP
4 Jan. 31, 2007

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
Feb. 1, 2007

Case reassigned to Judge S Maurice Hicks. Judge F A Little Jr no longer assigned to case. (crt,Dunford, T) (Entered: 02/01/2007)

PACER
Feb. 1, 2007

Add and Terminate Judges

5 Feb. 5, 2007

Consent Judgment

RECAP
6 March 19, 2007

Response (NOT Motions)

RECAP
7 July 2, 2007

Response (NOT Motions)

RECAP
8 Oct. 15, 2007

Remark

RECAP
9 March 17, 2008

Response (NOT Motions)

RECAP
10 July 1, 2008

Remark

RECAP
11 Oct. 20, 2008

Remark

RECAP
12 March 16, 2009

Remark

RECAP
13 June 25, 2009

Remark

RECAP
14 Oct. 13, 2009

Remark

RECAP
15 Feb. 2, 2010

Motion for Extension (Other)

RECAP
16 Feb. 3, 2010

Proposed Order/Judgment

RECAP
17 Feb. 9, 2010

Minute Entry/Order Setting Motion

RECAP
18 Feb. 19, 2010

Response to Motion

RECAP
19 March 2, 2010

Minute Entry

RECAP
20 March 2, 2010

Order on Motion for Extension

RECAP
21 March 18, 2010

Status Report

RECAP
22 April 29, 2010

Status Report

RECAP
23 April 30, 2010

Order

RECAP
24 June 22, 2010

Status Report

RECAP
25 Oct. 18, 2010

Status Report

RECAP
26 Oct. 28, 2010

Status Report

RECAP
27 Oct. 29, 2010

Order

RECAP
28 March 16, 2011

Status Report

RECAP
29 June 23, 2011

Motion to Substitute Attorney

RECAP
30 June 24, 2011

Order on Motion to Substitute Attorney

RECAP
31 June 29, 2011

Motion for Extension (Other)

RECAP
32 July 1, 2011

Order on Motion for Extension

RECAP
33 July 14, 2011

Motion for Extension (Other)

RECAP
34 July 14, 2011

Corrective Document

RECAP
35 July 18, 2011

Order on Motion for Extension

RECAP
36 July 29, 2011

Status Report

RECAP
37 Aug. 11, 2011

Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

RECAP
38 Aug. 11, 2011

Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Motion

RECAP
39 Aug. 12, 2011

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

RECAP
40 Aug. 22, 2011

Response to Motion

RECAP
41 Aug. 26, 2011

Motion for Leave to File

RECAP
42 Aug. 30, 2011

Order on Motion for Leave to File

RECAP
43 Aug. 30, 2011

Reply to Response to Motion

RECAP
44 Sept. 6, 2011

Minute Entry

RECAP
45 Oct. 25, 2011

Status Report

RECAP
46 Nov. 22, 2011

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
47 Nov. 23, 2011

Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
Nov. 23, 2011

Reset Deadlines as to 33 MOTION TO EXTEND and Modify Consent Decree: Motion day reset for 12/6/2011 01:30 PM before Judge S Maurice Hicks. (crt,McDonnell, D) (Entered: 11/23/2011)

PACER
Nov. 23, 2011

Set Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings

48 Dec. 2, 2011

Motion to Continue

RECAP
49 Dec. 5, 2011

Order on Motion to Continue

RECAP
Dec. 5, 2011

Set/Reset Deadlines as to 33 MOTION TO EXTEND and Modify Consent Decree. Motion day reset for 1/4/2012 01:30 PM in Shreveport, Courtroom 1 before Judge S Maurice Hicks. (crt,McDonnell, D) (Entered: 12/05/2011)

PACER
Dec. 5, 2011

Set Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings

50 Dec. 13, 2011

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
51 Dec. 14, 2011

Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
52 March 21, 2012

Status Report

RECAP
53 May 16, 2013

Motion to Intervene

RECAP
54 May 16, 2013

Motion to Intervene

RECAP
55 May 17, 2013

Corrective Document

RECAP
56 May 17, 2013

Notice of Motion Setting without date (DEACTIVATED EVENT)

RECAP
May 17, 2013

NOTICE of Corrective Action to Louis Granderson Scott on behalf of Doris Clark, Rhonda M Clark, Pelican All−Saints High School Benefit Society, Tracy Thomas, James Turner regarding 53 MOTION to Intervene. Action taken: Modified entry to more accurately identify the pleadings submitted as 53 Motion to Intervene, 54 Proposed Pleading, 55 Corrective Document entitled Memorandum in Support. (crt,Putch, A) (Entered: 05/17/2013)

PACER
May 17, 2013

Notice of Corrective Action

57 May 24, 2013

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
58 May 24, 2013

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
59 May 28, 2013

Notice of Motion Setting without date (DEACTIVATED EVENT)

RECAP
60 May 30, 2013

Memorandum in Opposition to Motion

RECAP
62 May 30, 2013

Letter

RECAP
61 May 31, 2013

Memorandum in Opposition to Motion

RECAP
63 June 7, 2013

Reply to Response to Motion

RECAP
64 June 7, 2013

Reply to Response to Motion

RECAP
June 7, 2013

NOTICE of Corrective Action to Louis Granderson Scott on behalf of Pelican All−Saints High School Benefit Society regarding 63 Reply to Response to Motion,. Action taken: Modified text to more accurately identify the pleading submitted. (crt,Kennedy, T) (Entered: 06/11/2013)

PACER
June 7, 2013

NOTICE of Corrective Action to Louis Granderson Scott on behalf of Pelican All−Saints High School Benefit Society regarding 64 Reply to Response to Motion,. Action taken: Modified text to more accurately identify the pleading submitted. (crt,Kennedy, T) (Entered: 06/11/2013)

PACER
June 7, 2013

Notice of Corrective Action

65 June 19, 2013

MEMORANDUM RULING re 53 MOTION to Intervene filed by Doris Clark, James Turner, Tracy Thomas, Rhonda M Clark, Pelican All-Saints High School Benefit Society. Signed by Judge S Maurice Hicks on 06/19/2013. (crt,McDonnell, D)

1 Searchable Copy of Opinion

View on PACER

RECAP
66 June 19, 2013

Order on Motion to Intervene

RECAP
67 June 19, 2013

Minute Entry

RECAP
68 June 25, 2013

Motion for Reconsideration

RECAP
69 June 25, 2013

Status Report

RECAP
70 June 25, 2013

Exhibit List

RECAP
71 June 26, 2013

Notice of Motion Setting without date (DEACTIVATED EVENT)

RECAP
72 June 26, 2013

Minute Entry

RECAP
73 June 26, 2013

Order on Motion for Reconsideration

RECAP
74 June 27, 2013

Order on Motion to Intervene

RECAP
75 June 27, 2013

Witness List

RECAP
76 June 27, 2013

Exhibit List

RECAP
77 June 27, 2013

Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP
78 June 27, 2013

Order

RECAP
79 July 10, 2013

Motion to Substitute Attorney

RECAP
80 July 11, 2013

Order on Motion to Substitute Attorney

RECAP
81 Aug. 16, 2013

Motion to Continue

RECAP
82 Aug. 19, 2013

Minute Entry

RECAP
83 Aug. 21, 2013

Memorandum in Opposition to Motion

RECAP
84 Aug. 26, 2013

Order on Motion to Continue

RECAP
85 Aug. 29, 2013

Transcript

RECAP
86 Oct. 2, 2013

Telephone Conference

RECAP
87 Oct. 2, 2013

Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory:

Louisiana

Case Type(s):

School Desegregation

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 11, 1967

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

United States Department of Justice

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

School District

Desoto Parish School Board

Defendant Type(s):

Elementary/Secondary School

Jurisdiction-wide

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.

Constitutional Clause(s):

Equal Protection

Other Dockets:

Western District of Louisiana 5:67-cv-12589

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 67-23345

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 67-23116

Supreme Court of the United States 78-458

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 68-26501

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 68-26544

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 68-26452

Western District of Louisiana 09981

Western District of Louisiana 12924

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 69-15556

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 69-02921

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 70-28788

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 76-03471

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 69-26285

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 69-27983

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Content of Injunction:

Auditing

Busing

Develop anti-discrimination policy

Discrimination Prohibition

Goals (e.g., for hiring, admissions)

Hire

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Monitoring

Other requirements regarding hiring, promotion, retention

Recordkeeping

Reporting

Required disclosure

Student assignment

Issues

General/Misc.:

Education

Racial segregation

School/University Facilities

School/University policies

Staff (number, training, qualifications, wages)

Transportation

Discrimination Area:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination Basis:

Race discrimination

Affected Race(s):

Black

Recommended Citation