ikovernor ) 11..\ CLEMENTS Campaign 71 TO: Mary Jane Governor Clements Campaign 805 Brazos Austin, Texas 78701 512 472-1982 FROM: B.D. DATE: July 13, 1982 RE: Bilingual Education Decision of the Fifth Circuit The Fifth Circuit made four basic rulings in the bilingual education case: 1. Even though the State successfully removed constitutional issues from the case (during John Hill's tenure), the attorney who tried the case for the State (assigned by Mark White) let those issues back in the case through post-trial argument. 2. Nevertheless, the stipulations that served as the factual basis for the trial court's ruling on the constitutional issues were so badly flawed by the poor work of the same attorney in White's office that they were not adequate to support the constitutional ruling. 3. The trial court should have tested the state's new biling- ual education law by required statutory standards. 4. The trial court must on remand conduct the statutory test of bilingual education programs on a district-by-district basis. In essence, as Jim says, the new bilingual legislation developed by Clements, Hobby and Clayton bailed White out of an embarrassingly mis- handled lawsuit. Possible WPC comments: a) "I am pleased that the Fifth Circuit acknowledged our efforts to expand and improve bilingual programs inthe state." b) "I am also pleased with the court's ruling that each:district will be permitted to justify its own bilingual program; this truly takes education out of the hands of Judge Justice and returns it to local control." c) "From now on, I hope the Attorney General will not permit such 'an exceedingly complex and important case,' to be 'prepared and organized for trial by a law student.' That's what the Fifth Circuit was dismayed to discover in this case." [Footnote 3, page 3431] Pol. adv paid by The Governor Clements Committee, Tom B. Rhodes, Treas. 807 Brazos, Austin, Texas 78701
