Non-feasance

[Marty Lederman]

Jack Balkin on this story:

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/04/return-of-separate-but-equal.html

And Heather Gerken:

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/04/beyond-segregationintegration-paradigm.html
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: matthewhpolsci at aol.com 
  To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu ; lawcourts-l at usc.edu ; jperezmonf at panam.edu ; nakoma at aol.com ; holden.j at bigpond.net.au ; benniethompson at mail.house.gov ; Rscottva3 at aol.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 4:57 PM
  Subject: Non-feasance


  Am I correctly informed (via The New York Times)  that Nebraska has adopted a statute providing for an African American, a white, and a Hispanic school district in Omaha?

  Is this, if true,  not patently in conflict with the overt language of Brown v. Board of Education?

  If that is true, is not the state attorney general not patently guilty of non-feasance (if not worse) in not so advising the legislature?

  Matthew Holden, Jr.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
  To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof

  Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20060421/666f5005/attachment.html