in behalf of “minority” (now a majority called “non-white”) students, throughout the District. But many minority persons by way of the proposed Nixon intervention have raised objections to the continuing regression (shown by District reports in lowering test scores since 1989) in the academic progress of minorities. They point out a need for improvement in the quality of education provided minorities, thereby in effect asserting that scarce educational funds could be better used by the District than at present. This conflicts with the demand on resources to achieve the race balancing objective of Plaintiffs’ attorneys. It confirms the obsolescence of such a class action by students not claiming to be an aggrieved minority class, originating under different demographic and legal circumstances than exist today.

We then argued that Groundswell was seeking termination of this case similarly by an order like the Crawford order, which notably did not contain any provisions approving constitutionally objectionable race-based pupil assignments. We argued that it was being implemented unconstitutionally by racial balancing in classrooms and schools throughout the district; in classrooms, under a basic 20% racial ratio rule, and, in schools, by racially gerrymandering school boundaries under the Board’s administrative procedure. We concluded that constitutional deficiencies such as these must be corrected.

On May 9, 1996, the Court set June 28, 1996, for “Hearing to Determine Final Order.” Groundswell had been informed that the Defendant Board had set public hearings on May 23 and May 30, 1996, re: its voluntary integration plan, and would present its proposed final order on or about June 18, 1996.
 

Second Memorandum by Groundswell

On May 15, 1996, Groundswell in a second brief noted that the Court had scheduled June 28, 1996 for hearing to determine the contents of the final order, approving a voluntary integration plan and discharging the writ of mandate. We referred to our March 19, 1996 brief calling for the presentation of a plan which would not carry forward the unconstitutional