The manner in which the United States courts have attempted to establish the validity of remedies and gain public acceptance of court orders in desegregation issues has encouraged public resistance to desegregation laws. In education related matters, the courts usually call on the expertise of lawyers and university professionals who have little contact with public education. Monitoring commissions established to provide information on implementation of court orders are composed of people who lack legal knowledge, are unrepresentative of the public school constituency, and may be biased. Responsibility for implementing desegregation orders that incorporate educational achievement goals is assigned to the administrative structures under which the need for remediation developed. Hence, most witnesses in litigation have thrived in the systems under assault, and may be defensive. The minorities who constitute most urban school populations feel powerless in demanding accountability from systems administered by personnel of a majority race and higher socioeconomic status. Finally, court decisions are based on inadequate data generated by poorly managed school systems. To improve the situation, judges must understand the school systems concerned in desegregation orders; frame orders in language that cannot be misinterpreted; and reassess the viability of attaching educational achievement goals to desegregation orders. (Author/MJL)