Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education
United States Supreme Court case
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case dealing with the busing of students to promote integration in public schools. The Court held that busing was an appropriate remedy for the problem of racial imbalance in schools. This was done to ensure the schools would be "properly" integrated and that all students would receive equal educational opportunities regardless of their race.
Judge John J. Parker of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit interpreted the Brown v. Board of Education case as a charge not to segregate rather than an order to integrate. In 1963, the Court ruled in McNeese v. Board of Education and Goss v. Board of Education in favor of integration, and showed impatience with efforts to end segregation. In 1968 the Warren Court ruled in Green v.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education” is united States Supreme Court case. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Swann, Charlotte-Mecklenburg and Board, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “united States Supreme Court case” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7653615. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1971, 1963 and 1968.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education primary sources, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education archive and Swann research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.