Brown v. Board of Education

<h1>Text Preview</h1> <p> <P>In 1896, the Supreme Court upheld state racial segregation laws based on the "separate but equal" doctrine in <i>Plessy v. Ferguson</i>. The Court ruled that making a legal distinction between races did not violate the Thirteenth Amendment forbidding involuntary servitude. In addition, the Court did not feel that <i>Plessy</i> violated the spirit of the Fourteenth Amendment, since no rights were to be denied black citizens. Laws requiring the separation of races, the Court declared, do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race.</P> </p> <p> <P>During the next five decades, blacks and whites went to separate schools, ate at separate restaurants, rode on separate buses, and drank from separate water fountains. Although the legality of segregation was based on a separate but equal doctrine, the actual facilities provided to blacks were rarely of the same quality of standard as those provided for whites. In the 1930's, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) began to challenge the "separate but equal" doctrine in the courts. Early victories for the NAACP included court rulings that insisted that facilities, primarily black schools, be upgraded to be comparable to white schools.</P> </p> <p> <P>The first real challenge to the constitutionality of state segregation laws came in 1938 when a black student, Lloyd Gaines, was denied admission to the Missouri School of Law. Although the Court affirmed Plessy (6-2) and did not require the school to accept Gaines, they did rule that the University had to pay for blacks to go to law school out of state or build a facility similar to that provided for white students. In 1950, a court rejected the State of Texas' intention to send black law students to a separate and inferior law school and ordered the University of Texas and other similar state universities to admit black students to their graduate programs.<br></P> <P>As court rulings began to challenge school segregation, much of the American public, particularly residents of southern states, remained opposed to allowing black students into white schools. Feelings among blacks that they remained "second-class citizens" created frustration and disillusionment within the black population. </P> </p> <p> <P>In 1953, President Dwight Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren to the Supreme Court. Warren hoped to make the issue of race and civil rights a referendum for the Court. He immediately began persuading other justices that the Court should take a leading role in civil rights reform. Soon after Warren took the bench, an NAACP-sponsored case came before the Court. <i>Brown v. Board of Education</i> provided a mechanism through which the Court could take a stand on civil rights. <br></P> <P>The case centered on Linda Brown, who lived with her family in Topeka, Kansas. The Topeka Board of Education had denied Brown admittance to an all-white school. Her father, a well-respected citizen, filed suit against the Topeka Board of Education hoping to force the issue of segregation in schools. </P> </p> <p> <P>Thurgood Marshall, the NAACP's legal director, argued before the Court on behalf of Brown. Marshall argued that a "separate but equal" philosophy violated the "equal protection" clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Even if facilities were equal in quality, Marshall argued, the mere presence of segregation made equal education impossible and caused irrevocable harm to both black and white children. </P> </p> <p> <P>In the unanimous decision delivered on May 17, 1954, the Court rejected the Plessy doctrine of separate but equal. Writing for the Court, Warren declared that "separate educational facilities" were "inherently unequal" because the intangible inequalities of separation deprived black students of equal protection under the law. One year later, after further discussion among the justices, they ruled that the integration of schools must go forward "with all deliberate speed."</P> </p> <p> <P>Segregationists reacted to the Court's ruling with disgust and open calls for opposition, organizing "massive resistance" to the idea of school integration. President Eisenhower, shocked by the Court's ruling, said that the ruling must be obeyed but did little to halt the growing protests among Southerners. State legislatures in the south passed more than 450 laws and resolutions aimed at preventing the enforcement of the Brown decision. Many states diverted public money to establish private whites-only schools where the Court's order could not be implemented as easily. In 1956, the Virginia state legislature cut funds for integrated schools in an effort to stall the growing movement. Critics decried the legislative tendencies of the Warren Court toward expanding rights for black Americans, but proponents pointed to the necessity to uphold the Constitutional rights which Congress failed to enforce.</P> </p> <p> <P>The resistance measures were effective. Only 700 of 10,000 school districts in the south had desegregated or were in the process of desegregation by the end of 1956. Southern protests, coupled with an uncertain American public, set the stage for a battle that would rage in courtrooms, in schools, and on the streets during the 1960's. </P> </p> <p id="TextCopyright">Copyright 2006 The Regents of the University of California and Monterey Institute for Technology and Education</p>