end in 2002.rnIn 1994, Patrick Wong was denied a plaee at l:op-rankedrne High School becanse Chinese-American cliiklren ninstrnOther legislation is being considered to end racialrnscore higjier on admissions tests than those of other etlmicrngronps. Brian Ho and Hilary Chen were tinned away fromrntheir neighborhood elementary schools becanse those schoolsrnhad readied their quota of Chinese-Americans. The families ofrnthese children filed a clas,s-action suit seeking to overturn SanrnFrancisco’s “desegregahon” plan.rnThe case, had it gone to trial, might well ha e ended the nnconstitiitionalrnviolation of the 14th Amendment nationall.rnUnfortnnately, a settlement was reached in the ease, allowingrnSan Francisco to continue forced busing and banning the usernof race only as a primary factor in school assignment. Thernschool district now is planning socioeconomic balancing, arguingrnthat separate neighborhood schools for rich and poor are inherendyrnunequal.rnOfficials in the Milwaukee, Wisconsin, school district filed arnsuit in 1982 against 24 suburban districts, claiming that theyrnhad contributed to racial isolation in the cih ‘s schools. A settlementrnwas reached to bus 5,700 minority students from the cityrnto suburban schools and about 700 white suburban students tornboth regular and magnet schools in the cit)’. The settlement alsornlimits the percentage of African-American teachers in mostrnschools.rnThe niavor of Milwaukee, John O. Norquist, however, hasrnrecently called for an end to the use of racial quotas in all aspectsrnof education, and Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson’srnproposed state budget calls for scaling back financial incentivesrnfor school districts taking part in a eity-suburban “desegregation”rnplan,rnbalancing.rnLittle Rock, Arkansas, along w ith North Little Rock and PulaskirnCount)’ schools, operates under a 1989 “desegregation settlement.”rnLittle Rock school officials say that the settlementrn(which mandates that Little Rock achieve racial balance, reducernthe achievement gap between whites and minorities, andrnanswer to a federally appointed “desegregation” monitoring office)rnis a heavy burden that has kept them from turning their attentionrnto other problems.rnMany “settlements” are little more than pledges or verbalrnpromises, never finalized into binding consent decrees.rnNevertheless, they arc considered binding bv social engineers.rnWhen court supervision in Omaha, Nebraska, ended inrn1984, the district “pledged” to maintain an integrated schoolrnsystem. Racial assignment has continued in Omaha. Ferndale,rnMichigan, was released from court control in 1995. Atrnthat time, Superintendent Marcie Martin swore an oath beforernU.S. District Judge Horace Gilmore to uphold the schools’rncarefully orchestrated racial mix.rnSome social engineers have launched last-ditch efforts for settlementsrnto continue racial balancing for as long as possible andrnto avoid a possible ruling that would set a precedent for undoingrncourt-ordered racial control nationwide.rnIn Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, an historic trialrnbegan April 19 before Federal District Judge Robert Potter.rnSome parents in Charlotte brought suit last }ear, arguing thatrnthe district unlawfully discriminated against students on the basisrnof race to achieve race-balance goals. Ultimately, the suitrnwas expanded to include a challenge to the district’s entirernschool desegregation plan, which involves magnet schools, attendancernzones drawn on the basis of race, and mandatory busing.rn’I’he superintendent then proposed a controlled clioice planrnas a settlement in the case, hoping to continue racial balancingrnfor several more years. The plan would have phased out the usernof race when assigning children to schools, but it yould notrnguarantee eer child a |)laee in the school closest to his home.rnRacial-balance requirements for schools would hae ended afterrnthree years.rnThe trial went forward, however. While it ended in June,rnJudge Potter savs he will need several months to review the testimonyrnbefore ruling.rnIn Rockford, Illinois, plaintiff attorney Bob Howard appearsrndetermined to ensure that racial control of student assignment,rnthrough controlled choice and the use of magnet schools, willrncontinue for many years. Local politicians and businessmenrnare pressuring the school board to settle “to achieve an early endrnto the case.” But releasing the district while maintaining racialrncontrol is hardh’ an end, let alone an early end.rnIn November 1998, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals orderedrnthe parties to discuss a possible settlement. Bob Howardrndemanded that the court order remain in effect over two morerndecades. A minimum of $148 million would be required forrnadditional construction.rnHoward demanded that the school board withdraw all pendingrnappeals, that present “desegregation” orders be accepted,rnand that a petition to inter’ene in the lawsuit by three boardrnmembers who have challenged the federal court’s authority tornorder them to change their votes against judicial taxation berndropped. Not surprisingly, discussions of a settlement stopped.rnOn March 19, 1999, the Seventh Circuit closed the door tornfurther appeals of funding orders but indicated that an end tornthe case was approaching:rnThe board told us at argument that it thinks full compliancernwith the decree is achievable bv 2002, and whenrnfull compliance is achieed, the decree must be dissolved.rnThe next logical step, therefore, is for the boardrnto propose to the magistrate judge, after consultation withrnthe plaintiffs and the master, a modificahon of the decreernthat will include an appropriate termination date (perhapsrna series of different dates for different programs) contingentrnon the achievement of specific targets demonstratingrna reasonable approximation to full compliance byrnthen.rnThe district court, howeer, has attempted to sidestep thatrn”next logical step,” ordering the district to pay three facilitatorsrnto help the parties “prompdy identify and embrace a middlernground that will end this litigation.”rnThere is no middle ground involving racial control of this nation’srnstudents.rnIt is enough of a blot on our nation’s history that courts havernissued orders requiring racial and ethnic quotas, calling suchrnorders “desegregation” and “remedial.” To settle for an)’thingrnthat would continue such racial control is irrational and immoral.rnWe should settle for nothing less than a complete end of judicialrntyranny and its resulting devastation of our school districts,rndisenfranchisement of our people, and racial and ethnicrncontrol of our children.rnOrnorn•sflrnH3rnt-Hrn>rnC^rnSEPTEMBER 1999/23rnrnrn