This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Kenneth W. Starr, petitioners contend that the district court found the Nogales school system failed to provide equal educational opportunity for English language learners.
According to Petitioners, petitioners seek complete dissolution of the district court’s immediate orders under Rule 60(b)(5).
Background and question before the Court
The district court held an eight‑day evidentiary hearing.
It made factual findings that the problems had not ceased in Nogales.
Petitioners ask the Supreme Court to grant relief under Rule 60(b)(5) to dissolve the lower court’s orders.
What each side argues
Petitioners
According to Kenneth W. Starr, the district court concluded that the Nogales school system failed to provide an equal educational opportunity for English language learners.
According to Petitioners, petitioners request that the Court dissolve the district court’s immediate orders under Rule 60(b)(5).
Respondent
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
State
The State argued that funding constraints do not exist in a way that would allow an optimal program.
According to State Attorney General, the State Attorney General noted that under the Arizona Constitution, funding decisions do not vary by district.
According to State Attorney General, the Attorney General contested the litigation at the outset.
United States (Amicus)
According to United States, the amicus brief emphasized that petitioners requested complete dissolution of the court’s immediate orders under Rule 60(b)(5).
According to United States, it argued that HB 2064 satisfies the judgment and that the No Child Left Behind Act preempts the EEOA.
What happened at oral argument
Oral argument before the Supreme Court began at 11:05 a.m.
Justice Souter asked whether the district had failed to provide funds to accomplish its plan.
Justice Ginsburg asked Mr. Starr to return to the beginning of the 60(b) motion.
Justice Kennedy asked about the error in the findings and order after the eight‑day hearing.
Justice Scalia asked whether the No Child Left Behind Act preempts the EEOA.
Justice Alito asked about the Ninth Circuit’s decision and the cost of a new plan.
- [1] bc2e80b7557abc038592-r1-76f958c7fc4b7922.pdf, p. 1
- [2] bc2e80b7557abc038592-r1-76f958c7fc4b7922.pdf, p. 4
- [3] bc2e80b7557abc038592-r1-76f958c7fc4b7922.pdf, p. 12
- [4] bc2e80b7557abc038592-r1-76f958c7fc4b7922.pdf, p. 20
- [5] bc2e80b7557abc038592-r1-76f958c7fc4b7922.pdf, p. 29
- [6] bc2e80b7557abc038592-r1-76f958c7fc4b7922.pdf, p. 31
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- bc2e80b7557abc038592-r1-76f958c7fc4b7922.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 23, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.