area to be successful. Falcon considered basing a suit on the theory that the joint action
of developers and county authorities made the county responsible for resulting
segregation. It turned out that no new theories were necessary to establish unlawful
segregation on the facts of this case. Ultimately, Professor Falcon resigned from the
faculty to go into private practice.

195.     Vaughns v. Board of Education of Prince George's County, 355 F. Supp. 1034 (1972).

196.     Vaughns v. Board of Education of Prince George's County, 355 F. Supp. 1038 (D. Md.
1972). Plaintiffs appealed the delay, but the Court of Appeals denied the appeal on the
grounds that the district court had retained jurisdiction and would review the plans again
before January. 468 F.2d 894 (4th Cir. 1972).

197.     Vaughns v. Board of Education of Prince George's County, 355 F. Supp. 1051 (D. Md.
1972).

198.     Vaughns v. Board of Educ. of Prince George's County, 574 F. Supp. 1280, 1317-19,
1323, 1325, 1332,1337, 1353 (1983).

199.     The decision of the Supreme Court in Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974) limited
the remedy for segregation to the political unit which acted unlawfully. Two years
earlier, in Starr v. Parks. 345 F. Supp. 795 (D. Md. 1972), parents of white children in
Baltimore City near the Anne Arundel county line sought to have the federal court direct
enrollment of their children in predominantly white county schools. They contended that
the political boundary lines contributed to segregation, and therefore could not be used in
determining appropriate school districts for children. The District Court dismissed the
complaint on the grounds that the relief requested would hasten the segregation
complained of. It noted its disapproval of multidistrict busing, and pointed out
difficulties in plaintiffs' request that interdistrict enrollment be limited to students at or
near the county line.

200.     In 1986, the Superintendent of Schools in Prince Gorge's County proposed an

acceleration of the five year plan for magnet schools. The Prince George's County
Branch of the NAACP opposed acceleration, saying that more study of the effects of the
existing plan were needed before going further. The local branch expressed concerns that
black children may be bearing an unfair burden in busing patterns and school closings and
requested information on whether the new magnet programs were benefiting white
children more than black children. On the other hand, some individual plaintiffs
supported the acceleration of the creation of magnet schools, and the national office of the
NAACP gave no indication of its position. "P.G. NAACP Opposes Accelerating Magnet
Plan," Washington Post, March 11, 1986, p. Bl.

The Prince George's County Board of Education voted to support the accelerated
increase in magnet schools and "compensatory funding." Board member Thomas
Hendershot said "No one has ever offered a desegregation proposal that offers as much

226