Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Milliken v. Bradley Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States1974Docket #1119562
41 L. Ed. 2d 1069 94 S. Ct. 3112 418 U.S. 717 1974 U.S. LEXIS 94 Constitutional Law Federal Courts Civil Rights

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: The Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s order for a multi-district, metropolitan desegregation plan for Detroit. The Court held that because only the Detroit school district was found to have engaged in unconstitutional segregation, the remedy could not extend to surrounding, legally compliant suburban districts.

Legal Significance: This case significantly limited the scope of school desegregation remedies by establishing that an interdistrict remedy is impermissible unless it is proven that the outlying districts also engaged in constitutional violations or that school district lines were drawn with discriminatory intent.

Milliken v. Bradley Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Plaintiffs brought a class action alleging that the Detroit school system was racially segregated due to the official policies of the Detroit Board of Education and the State of Michigan. The District Court found that both the city and state defendants had committed acts of de jure segregation through policies regarding attendance zones, school construction, and student transportation. After concluding that any desegregation plan confined to the city of Detroit would be ineffective—as it would result in an overwhelmingly Black school system due to demographic realities and the likelihood of ‘white flight’—the District Court determined that a metropolitan-wide remedy was necessary. It ordered the development of a desegregation plan encompassing Detroit and 53 surrounding suburban school districts. However, there was no finding that these suburban districts had independently committed any constitutional violations, nor was there evidence that the school district boundaries had been drawn for the purpose of racial segregation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the propriety of an interdistrict remedy, reasoning that the State’s control over all school districts provided the authority to implement such a plan to remedy the State’s constitutional violations.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: May a federal court impose a multi-district, interdistrict remedy to address de jure segregation found in a single school district, absent a finding that the other included districts have committed constitutional violations that have a cross-district segregative effect?

No. The relief ordered by the District Court was improper because it Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Exce

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

May a federal court impose a multi-district, interdistrict remedy to address de jure segregation found in a single school district, absent a finding that the other included districts have committed constitutional violations that have a cross-district segregative effect?

Conclusion

This landmark decision effectively insulated suburban school districts from involvement in urban Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo

Legal Rule

The scope of an equitable remedy in a school desegregation case is Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in

Legal Analysis

The Court's analysis began with the foundational principle from *Swann* that "the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sun

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A federal court may not impose a multi-district desegregation remedy for
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Exce

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+