Case: Miller & United States of America v. Board of Education of Gadsden
4:63-cv-00574 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Filed Date: Nov. 18, 1963
Closed Date: 2005
Clearinghouse coding complete
Case Summary
This school desegregation case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama on 11/18/1963 and ended in 2005. Brought by private plaintiffs and the United States, it dealt with the public schools in the city of Gadsden, Alabama.
Note: Most of the following summary comes from the decision by Judge L. Scott Coogler declaring the case over and the schools "unitary" (a legal declaration that the school district is in compliance with the Equal Protection Clause's mandate of integrated schools) on August 26, 2005, after more than 40 years of court ordered desegregation efforts. There was only one published opinion on Westlaw for the case (detailed below).
In 1963, the plaintiff, Catherine Miller, through her mother, filed this action to enjoin the school segregation in Gadsden, Alabama.
On December 27, 1963, the court found that the Board was violating the Constitution by operating a dual school district; it ordered the Board to desegregate under a "freedom of choice" plan. However, in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in Green v. County School Board of New Kent County, 391 U.S. 430 (1968) disapproving of freedom-of-choice as a desegregation remedy, the district court ordered the Board to revise its plan. On July 25, 1969, the Board did so.
Between 1969 and 1975, the district court approved various amendments and additions to the Board's plan. One of these amendments concerned an issue that ultimately reached the Fifth Circuit. In March of 1972, the plaintiffs filed a motion for further relief, requesting that the Board amend its plan to comply with the Supreme Court's decision in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971). The district court approved the Board's amendments, but on appeal, the Fifth Circuit found the Board's changes inadequate in light of Swann. 482 F.2d 1234 (5th Cir. Aug. 7, 1973).
In April 1975, the Board adopted a plan based on a University of Tennessee Study, which attempted to maximize desegregation without resorting to busing. Instead, it shifted the boundaries within the district and more strictly enforced zone attendance.
On October 23, 1987, the district court entered a show cause order why the case should not be dismissed. However, on October 11, 1988, the court stayed all action on its desegregation cases pending the resolution of several related cases on appeal to the Eleventh Circuit. Finally, in 1995, the parties jointly agreed to a consent decree. The order required the Board to implement a voluntary "majority-to-minority" student transfer policy. It also listed actions pursuant to all areas outlined in Green and Freeman v. Pitts, 503 U.S. 467 (1992). The consent decree lasted four years.
In May 1999, the Board petitioned for -- and was granted -- unitary status by the district court (Judge William Acker). However, the Eleventh Circuit reversed and remanded for further factual finding. Miller v. Board of Education of Gadsden, Alabama, No. 00-1224 (11th Cir. Aug. 8, 2001).
On July 14, 2003, the district court approved another consent decree. (Later modified again in 2004.) The decree provided for the consolidation of the system's high schools and the closing of one elementary school. It concluded that the Board had achieved unitary status in many of the Green areas and discharged its jurisdiction over those areas. It also outlined the Board's remaining obligations. It finally provided that within 30 days of the end of the 2004-05 school year, the Board could file a motion for full unitary status.
On June 10, 2005, the Board again filed a motion for unitary status. The United States, which had earlier intervened in the case, stated that it had no objections -- as did the private plaintiffs, who also reserved the right to reverse their view after a public hearing.
On August 26, 2005, the court (at this point, Judge L. Scott Coogler) declared the school system unitary. In his order, Judge Coogler assessed favorably the Board's progress in the remaining areas of the 2003 decree, including, among other things, the Majority-to-Minority Transfer Policy, Facilities, Student Assignment, and Future Action.
On February 11, 2016, the district court denied the private plaintiff's motion for reconsideration.
Available Opinionss
Miller v. Board of Education of Gadsden, 482 F.2d 1234 (5th Cir. Aug. 7, 1973)
Miller and United States of America v. Board of Education of Gadsden, Alabama, Civ. A. No. CV.63-CO-474 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 26, 2005) (declaring unitary status).
Summary Authors
Greg Margolis (2/23/2017)
People
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5450993/parties/miller-v-bd-of-ed-gadsden/
Birch, Stanley F. Jr. (Georgia)
Boddie, Elise C. (New York)
Chachkin, Norman J. (New York)
Biggs, Gregory Marion (Alabama)
Boyd, Ralph F. Jr. (District of Columbia)
Chachkin, Norman J. (New York)
Epperson, Lia B. (District of Columbia)
Evans, Lisa (District of Columbia)
Glassman, Jeremiah (District of Columbia)
Guzman, Javier M (District of Columbia)
Hu, Margaret (District of Columbia)
Jones, Elaine R. (District of Columbia)
Lee, Bill Lann (District of Columbia)
Documents in the Clearinghouse
Resources
Docket
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5450993/miller-v-bd-of-ed-gadsden/
Last updated Oct. 10, 2026, 5:29 a.m.
Docket for: Miller v. Bd of Ed, Gadsden
Case Details
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Nov. 18, 1963
Closing Date: 2005
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
African-American school children and the United States of America
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Attorney Organizations:
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
School District
City of Gadsden
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
Northern District of Alabama 4:63-cv-00574
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 00-12224
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed
Relief Granted:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Content of Injunction:
Order Duration: 1963 - 2005
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Basis:
Affected Race(s):
Case Summary of Miller & United States of America v. Board of Education of Gadsden, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/13841/ (last updated 2/23/2017).