(1909) (state law authorized municipal tax in support of bond obligation; subsequent legislation removing the authority is invalid under Contracts Clause, and mandamus will lie against municipal official to collect the tax); Graham v. Folsom, A second set of cases, including the Von Hoffman case relied upon by the Court, invalidates on Contracts Clause grounds statutory limitations on taxation power passed subsequent to grants of tax authority in support of bond obligations. But if, as the State argues, its papers qualified for treatment as a petition for rehearing within the meaning of Rule 40 as well as a suggestion for rehearing in banc under Rule 35, the 90-day period for seeking certiorari began on October 14, 1988, and the State's petition for certiorari was timely filed. Ante, at 52-53, n. 18. Rule App. Finding that construction of new schools would result in more "attractive" facilities than renovation of existing ones, the District Court approved new construction at a cost ranging from $61.80 per square foot to $95.70 per square foot as distinct from renovation at $45 per square foot. 443 418 The District Court's approval of the levy was necessary because the Court of Appeals had required it to establish a maximum for the levy. The State's certiorari petition was timely filed. We accept, without approving or disapproving, the Court of Appeals' conclusion that the District Court's remedy was proper. True, today's case is not an instance of one branch of the Federal Government invading the province of another. On September 16, 1988, the State filed with the Court of Appeals a document styled "State Appellants' Petition for Rehearing En Banc." The District Court thereafter issued an order detailing the remedies necessary to eliminate the vestiges of segregation and the financing necessary to implement those remedies. Footnote 19 Id., at 103a. Absent a change in state law, no increase in property taxes could take X, 11(b),(c). to Pet. If we had accepted the State's broader, foundational question going to the magnet school concept, we could also have made an informed decision on whether that element of the District Court's remedial scheme was within the limits of the Court's equitable discretion in response to the constitutional . Can a court create a segregation remedial plan which has a goal of attracting nonminority students into the district? [495 O'CONNOR, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which SCALIA, J., joined, and in which REHNQUIST, C.J., joined in part, post, p. 491 U. S. 289. . Even when faced with open defiance of the mandate of educational equality, however, no court has ever found necessary a remedy of the scope presented here. The District Court declined to require the State to pay for KCMSD's obligations because it believed that the Court of Appeals had ordered it to allocate the costs between the two governmental entities. 433 is not a petition for rehearing within the meaning of this Rule." It is not a function the Judiciary as an institution is designed to exercise. It makes no difference that the KCMSD stands "ready, willing, and . Rather, the cases show that where a limitation on the local authority's taxing power is not a subsequent enactment itself in violation of the Contracts Clause, a federal court is without power to order a tax levy that goes beyond the authority granted by state law. 164.013.1 (Supp. 421 (WD Mo. ] The Court of Appeals "affirm[ed] the actions that the court has taken to this point," but detailed "the procedures which the district court should use in the future." 1). for Rehearing by Court En Banc," id., at 458-469, and Clark Group filed a "Petition for Rehearing En Banc with Suggestions in Support." U.S. 131, 137 Accepting the District Court's conclusion that state law limitations prevented KCMSD from raising sufficient funds, it held that those limitations must fall to the Constitution's command, and affirmed all of the District Court's actions taken to that point. 19 (1985). for Cert. App. R-2 v. United States, Rather, it found only that the taxation orders were necessary to fund the particular remedy it had devised. 411 [495 A suggestion is neither a petition nor a motion; consequently, it requires no disposition by the court." 1986) (en banc), cert. Pp. 317 The District Court's January 3, 1989, order does not support, but refutes, the Court's characterization. It is plain that the KCMSD had no such power under state law. Third, the federal courts in devising a remedy must take into account the interests of state and local authorities in managing their own affairs, consistent with the Constitution. 16494. [495 The District Court realigned KCMSD as a party defendant, School Dist. Missouri v. Jenkins, The Eleventh Amendment does not prohibit enhancement of a fee award under 1988 against a State to compensate for delay in payment. Forcing citizens to make financial decisions in fear of the fledgling judicial tax collector's next misstep must detract from the dignity and independence of the federal courts. Gonzalez v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co., 773 F.2d 637, 639 (CA5 1985); Eleventh Circuit Rule 35-6. (1977), the District Court found this insufficient. . (a) This Court accepts the Court of Appeals' conclusion that the District Court's remedy was proper. Footnote 21 The Missouri Constitution limits local property taxes to $1.25 per $100 of assessed valuation unless a majority of the voters in the district approve a higher levy, up to $3.25 per $100; the levy may be raised above $3.25 per $100 only if two-thirds of the voters agree. In this 18-year-old school desegregation litigation, see, e. g., Missouri v. Jenkins, 495 U. S. 33, Missouri challenges the District Court's orders . 113a. of Education, , we stated that the enforcement of a money judgment against the State did not violate principles of federalism because "[t]he District Court . for Cert. [495 672 F. Supp. 855 F.2d 1295, Alyssa Barnes Case Brief- Week 11 November 15, 2021 Missouri v. Jenkins, 495 U.S. 33, 110 S. Ct. 1651 (1990) Facts: The Kansas City Missouri District Court uncovered in action 42 U.S.C. coupons then due. U.S. 449 U.S. 381 433 (1947). 41 ("nothing in the record to suggest" that tax limitation was intended to frustrate desegregation) with Griffin, supra, at 221 (State Constitution amended as part of state and school district plan to resist desegregation). Footnote 10 298 By this I do not mean that the remedy is, as we assume this one was, within the broad discretion of the district court. U.S. 33, 65] U.S. 187, 196 (1909); Graham v. Folsom, U.S. 33, 78]. Whatever the Court thinks of the Court of Appeals' opinion, the District Court on remand appears to have thought it was under no compulsion to disturb its existing order establishing the $4 property tax rate through fiscal year 1991-1992 unless and until it became necessary to raise property taxes even higher. (Rehnquist, C.J.) 449 But the Court of Appeals' entire discussion of "a preferable method for future funding," ibid., can be considered no more than dictum, the court itself having already upheld the District Court's actions to date. 349 Supp., at 53-55. As the Court chooses to discuss the question of future taxation, however, I must state my respectful disagreement with its analysis and conclusions on this vital question. (1881); United States v. New Orleans, . Missouri v. Jenkins - Case Briefs - 1988, Case Briefs - 1989, Case Briefs - 1994 Missouri v. Jenkins PETITIONER:Missouri RESPONDENT:Kalima Jenkins et al. U.S. 381 Jenkins v. Missouri, supra, at 34-35. The operation of tax systems is among the most difficult aspects of public administration. On June 14, 1985, the district court entered its first order for the desegregation of the Kansas City, Missouri, School District. 433 It also approved the $142,736,025 budget proposed by KCMSD for implementation of the magnet school plan, as well as the expenditure of $52,858,301 for additional capital improvements. It held that both orders exceeded the District Courts authority, as they went beyond the nature and scope of the school districts initial constitutional violation. (c) The modifications are not invalid under the Tenth Amendment, since that Amendment's reservation of nondelegated powers to the States is not implicated by a federal court judgment enforcing the express prohibitions of unlawful state conduct enacted by the Fourteenth Amendment. District courts can and must take needed steps to eliminate racial discrimination and ensure the operation of unitary school systems. The District Court further ordered the State to fund fully other portions of the desegregation program intended to reduce class size and to improve student achievement. Missouri v. Jenkins (Jenkins III) United States Supreme Court 515 U.S. 70 (1995) Facts The Kansas City, Missouri, School District (the district) (plaintiff) and a group of students (plaintiff) sued Missouri (defendant) in 1977 for maintaining a segregated school system in violation of Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Rather, it affirmed "the actions that the court has taken to this point." Peter S. Hendrixson filed a brief for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law as amicus curiae urging affirmance. 855 F.2d, at 1318. 88-64 Argued February 21, 1989 Decided June 19, 1989 491 U.S. 274 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In this major school desegregation litigation in Kansas City, Missouri, in which various desegregation remedies were granted against the State of Missouri and other (1881) (same). U.S. 951 855 F.2d 1295 (CA 81988), affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. U.S. 441, 445 U.S., at 291 Language links are at the top of the page across from the title. The Federalist, No. This case has been before the same United States District Judge since 1977. Throughout the remedial phase of the litigation, the KCMSD proposed ever more expensive capital improvements with the agreement of the plaintiffs, and the State objected. 535 (1867); Board of Commissioners of Knox County v. Aspinwall, 24 How. en banc are denied." (1906); Credit Co. v. Arkansas Central R. Co., 1961) (A. Hamilton). The Court of Appeals observed that the increases were designed to eliminate the vestiges of state-imposed segregation by improving the "desegregative attractiveness" of the district and by reversing "white flight" to the suburbs. 3 More important, this possibility is nothing more or less than the necessary consequence of any limit on judicial power. Our statement in Davis rested on the explicit holding in Moses Lake Homes, Inc. v. Grant County, [495 [495 one regarded as a distinct unit because of a particular characteristic, The attempt to end the practice of separating children of different races into distinct public schools. In agreement with the Court that we have jurisdiction to decide this case, I join Parts I and II of the opinion. It determined that segregation had caused a systemwide reduction in student achievement in the city district's schools and ordered a wide range of remedial "quality education" programs for all students in the city district's schools. In rejecting the KCMSD's request, the District Court left in effect the $4 rate it had established in its October 27, 1987, order. Many of the goals of the quality education programs have been attained, and there is an interest in having the court hand back over control to the State and local authorities. Get free summaries of new US Supreme Court opinions delivered to your inbox! Perhaps it is good educational policy to provide a school district with the items included in the KCMSD capital improvement plan, for example: high schools in which every classroom will have air conditioning, an alarm system, and 15 microcomputers; a 2,000-square-foot planetarium; greenhouses and vivariums; a 25-acre farm with an air-conditioned meeting room for 104 people; a Model United Nations wired for language translation; broadcast capable radio and television studios with an editing and animation lab; a temperature controlled art gallery; movie editing and screening rooms; a 3,500-square-foot dust-free diesel mechanics room; 1,875-square-foot elementary school animal rooms for use in a zoo project; swimming pools; and numerous other facilities. 55a (correcting order for assessment of penalties for nonpayment that "mistakenly" assessed penalties on an extra tax year); id., at 57a ("clarify[ing]" the inclusion of savings and loan institutions, estates, trusts, and beneficiaries in the court's income tax surcharge and enforcement procedures). The court then directed KCMSD to "approve a property tax levy rate for 1989 at a later date when financial calculations for the 1989-1990 school year are clear and submit the proposed levy rate to the Court for approval at that time." U.S. 622, 625 . In civil cases, applications for extension of time must be presented during the original 90-day period. In some of these cases, the officials charged with administering the tax resigned their positions, and the Court held that no judicial remedy was available. art. Supp., at 412-413. visual attractiveness sought by the Court as it would result in floor coverings with unsightly sections of mismatched carpeting and tile, and individual walls possessing different shades of paint." I do not acknowledge the troubling departures in today's majority opinion as either necessary or appropriate to ensure full compliance with the Equal Protection Clause and its mandate to eliminate the cause and effects of racial discrimination in the schools. Jenkins v. Missouri, 639 F. Supp. In this major school desegregation litigation in Kansas City, Missouri, in which various desegregation remedies were granted against the State of Missouri and other defendants, the plaintiff class was represented by a Kansas City lawyer (Benson) and by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF). Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70 (1995), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court. Footnote 3 102 14 The Supreme Court ruled that while direct imposition of taxes is indeed beyond judicial authority, the district court could order the school district to levy the same tax: "Authorizing and directing local government institutions to devise and implement remedies not only protects the function of these institutions but, to the extent possible, also places the responsibility for solutions to the problems of segregation upon those themselves who have created the problem." The practice does not extend to petitions for rehearing seeking only to correct a formal defect in the judgment or opinion of the lower court. Milliken v. Bradley, The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. operates to suspend the finality of the . U.S. 33, 77] [ Under the circumstances of this case, we cannot say it was an abuse of discretion for the District Court to rule that KCMSD should be responsible for funding its share of the remedy. 317 Instead, the District Court's conclusion that desegregation might be easier if more nonminority students could be attracted into the KCMSD was used as the hook on which to hang numerous policy choices about improving the quality of education in general within the KCMSD. U.S. We turn to the constitutional issues. U.S. 141, 145 103 The State's complaint that this suit represents the attempt of a school district that could not obtain public support for increased spending to enlist the District Court to finance its educational policy cannot be dismissed out of hand. On January 10, 1989, the Clerk of the Court of Appeals issued an amended order, recalling the October 14 mandate and entering nunc pro tunc, effective October 14, an order denying the three "petitions for rehearing with suggestions for rehearing en banc." Taxation by a legislature raises no due process concerns, for the citizens'"rights are protected in the only way that they can be in a complex society, by their power, immediate or remote, over those who make the rule." [495 On September 16, the State filed with the court a document styled "State Appellants' Petition for Rehearing En Banc." The trial lasted for months. See Mo. (1915). -281 (1977). You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. court's judgment, pending the court's further determination whether the judgment should be modified so as to alter its adjudication of the rights of the parties." The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri imposed an increase in the property taxes levied by the Kansas City, Missouri, School District (KCMSD) to ensure funding for the desegregation of KCMSD's public schools.