Milliken v. Bradley
E33464
Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
All labels observed (4)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Milliken v. Bradley canonical | 4 |
| Milliken v. Bradley (1977) | 1 |
| Milliken v. Bradley (Milliken II) | 1 |
| Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974) | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T252696 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Milliken v. Bradley Context triple: [NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, notableCase, Milliken v. Bradley]
-
A.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
B.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
C.
DeBoer v. Snyder
DeBoer v. Snyder was a federal court case challenging Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban that became one of the key cases consolidated into the landmark Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
-
D.
South Dakota v. Dole
South Dakota v. Dole is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to condition federal highway funds on states adopting a minimum drinking age of 21, helping define the scope of the federal spending power.
-
E.
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut is a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case that first applied the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to the states, striking down a state law that improperly restricted religious proselytizing.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Milliken v. Bradley Target entity description: Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
-
A.
Briggs v. Elliott
Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
-
B.
Bolling v. Sharpe
Bolling v. Sharpe is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racial segregation in Washington, D.C. public schools unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
-
C.
DeBoer v. Snyder
DeBoer v. Snyder was a federal court case challenging Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban that became one of the key cases consolidated into the landmark Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
-
D.
South Dakota v. Dole
South Dakota v. Dole is a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power to condition federal highway funds on states adopting a minimum drinking age of 21, helping define the scope of the federal spending power.
-
E.
Cantwell v. Connecticut
Cantwell v. Connecticut is a 1940 U.S. Supreme Court case that first applied the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause to the states, striking down a state law that improperly restricted religious proselytizing.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
education law case ⓘ landmark school desegregation case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil rights law
ⓘ
constitutional law ⓘ education law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | February 27, 1974 ⓘ |
| citation | 418 U.S. 717 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Equal Protection Clause
ⓘ
surface form:
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | July 25, 1974 ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
Lewis F. Powell Jr.
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.
Thurgood Marshall ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Thurgood Marshall
William J. Brennan Jr. ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William J. Brennan Jr.
William O. Douglas ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William O. Douglas
|
| docketNumber | 73-434 ⓘ |
| effect |
contributed to continued racial segregation between urban and suburban school districts
ⓘ
limited the reach of metropolitan-wide desegregation plans ⓘ |
| fullName | Milliken v. Bradley self-link ⓘ |
| holding |
Federal courts may not impose multi-district, area-wide desegregation plans absent a showing that multiple districts had deliberately engaged in a common, interdistrict constitutional violation
ⓘ
Without proof of interdistrict segregation, remedies must be limited to the district where a constitutional violation is found ⓘ |
| issue | scope of federal court power to order interdistrict school desegregation remedies ⓘ |
| joinedMajority |
Byron R. White
ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Harry A. Blackmun
Potter Stewart ⓘ
surface form:
Justice Potter Stewart
William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
surface form:
Justice William H. Rehnquist
|
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| legalPrinciple |
de jure segregation must be shown on an interdistrict basis to justify interdistrict remedies
ⓘ
school desegregation remedies must be commensurate with the nature and scope of the constitutional violation ⓘ |
| locationOfUnderlyingDispute |
Detroit
ⓘ
surface form:
Detroit, Michigan
|
| majorityOpinionBy |
Warren E. Burger
ⓘ
surface form:
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger
|
| page | 717 ⓘ |
| petitioner | William G. Milliken, Governor of Michigan ⓘ |
| precedentStatus | binding precedent on interdistrict desegregation remedies in U.S. federal courts ⓘ |
| rearguedDate | April 24, 1974 ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Milliken v. Bradley
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Milliken v. Bradley (Milliken II)
|
| relatedTo |
Brown v. Board of Education
ⓘ
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education ⓘ |
| remedyTypeConsidered | cross-district busing ⓘ |
| reporter | United States Reports ⓘ |
| respondent | Ronald H. Bradley et al. ⓘ |
| shortName | Milliken I ⓘ |
| topic |
busing for school integration
ⓘ
federal courts’ equitable powers ⓘ school desegregation ⓘ |
| volume | 418 ⓘ |
| vote | 5–4 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Milliken v. Bradley Description of subject: Milliken v. Bradley is a landmark 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by ruling that courts could not impose cross-district busing plans absent proof of interdistrict segregation.
Referenced by (7)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.