In the debate about the existence of a link between court ordered school desegregation and white flight, a good deal of confusion has arisen over that courts have actually decided in school desegregation cases and what factors influence their decisions. This brief article represents an attempt to dispel the confusion by summarizing the major legal principles that govern courts in determining whether a wrong has occurred, and, if so, what remedies may properly be applied. In posing questions about the role of the courts, the article uses quotations by sociologist James Coleman because his quoted views illustrate popular misconceptions about what courts do and why they do it. In sum, Federal courts in determining both whether a wrong has been committed and the appropriate redress have been actuated by legal principles, not by sociological or educational theories. In deciding on the existence of a wrong, the courts have been insistent that psychological or sociological evidence of harm is not sufficient proof of deliberate action by public officials to segregate schools. On the issue of remedy, courts do have more flexibility, but here they also face constraints. Indeed, far from promotion white flight, courts appear to have achieved stable integration. (Author/AM)