The 1977 Supreme Court decision in "Milliken v. Bradley," involving the Detroit public schools and the state of Michigan, held that federal courts possess the authority not only to order the implementation of educational program components as part of a desegregation remedy, but also to assess a portion of the cost of such components against the state treasury. Since 1977 similarly comprehensive desegregation plans have been ordered and/or analogous claims of responsibility and extraschool district liability advanced in litigation involving a number of other communities. These cases have presented a host of difficult factual, legal, and public policy issues not expressly resolved by the Supreme Court in "Milliken." These issues involve (1) the expanding nature of remedial regimes, (2) the theories and bases of state and local liability upon which the funding of these remedies may be predicated, and (3) the means by which such obligations may be financed and the authority of the court to mandate a particular source or method by which the needed resources are to be marshalled. This paper provides a general survey of selected issues and the manner in which they have been addressed and resolved to date by some of the trial and appellate courts presiding over "Milliken's" progeny. A hierarchy of judicial actions organized according to their intrusivenes is also synthesized from the case law. (MLF)