intervenors and alleging their individual claims along with other claims school boards had heretofore been unable to assert, or had not asserted, under the state and federal constitutions.

The allegations in the Complaint in Intervention included the following claims by the Intervenors:

37. The mandatory assignment of student Intervernors, and others similarly situated, because of their race, to particular public schools within said District violates, and would violate, the rights of Intervenors, and others similarly situated, under the California Constitution, for reasons which include the following:

A. It is contrary to the provisions of Article I, Section 7(a), as amended November 6, 1979;

B. It discriminates against parent and student Intervenors because of their race and denies them equal protection of the law, in violation of Art. I, Sec. 7(a);

D. If ordered by the Court, it infringes upon the rights of Intervenors to the governing participation to which they are entitled in the operation of the District, and invades the province of the legislative and executive branches, in violation of Article I, Sections 1 and 24 and Article III, Section 3....

39. The mandatory assignment of student Intervenors, and others similarly situated, because of their race, to particular public schools within said District violates, and would violate, the rights of Intervenors, and others similarly situated, under the United States Constitution, for reasons which include the following:

A. It constitutes state action discriminating against parent and student Intervenors because of their race, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment;