Brown v. Board of Education? |
Did you mean | Travel | Economics | Finance | Marketing | Business | Culture | Geography | History | Life | Mathematics | Science | Society | Technology | New site added |
| Add a link on the top of this Brown v. Board of Education page Express submission by secure payment ! |
| Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
||||||||
| Decided May 17, 1954 | ||||||||
|
||||||||
| Holding | ||||||||
| Racial segregation in public education violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; separate facilities are “inherently unequal.” | ||||||||
| Court membership | ||||||||
| Chief Justice: Earl Warren Associate Justices: Tom C. Clark, Robert H. Jackson, Harold Burton, Sherman Minton, Felix Frankfurter, Hugo L. Black, Stanley Reed, William O. Douglas |
||||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||||
| Majority by: Warren Joined by: Clark, Jackson, Burton, Minton, Frankfurter, Black, Reed, Douglas Dissent: Unanimous opinion |
||||||||
| Laws applied | ||||||||
| U.S. Const. Amend. XIV |
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) was a landmark case of the United States Supreme Court which explicitly outlawed de jure racial segregation of public education facilities (legal establishment of separate government-run schools for blacks and whites), ruling so on the grounds that the doctrine of "separate but equal" public education could never truly provide black Americans with facilities of the same standards available to white Americans. A companion case dealt with the constitutionality of segregation in the District of Columbia, (not a state and therefore not subject to the Fourteenth Amendment), Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954).
Have to see |
Contents |
|
Background
For much of the 90 years preceding 1954, race relations in the United States had been dominated by segregation, a system of racial separation which, while in name providing for separate but equal treatment of both white and black Americans, in truth perpetuated inferior accommodations, services, and treatment for black Americans. Segregation in education varied wildly from the 17 states which required segregation to the 16 which prohibited it. Brown is undoubtedly the most famous of a group of U.S. Supreme Court cases which principally deal with the struggle of black, latino and Indian Americans to recover the rights of citizenship expressly given to them by the Constitution of the United States. The related cases are listed below.
The case
Educational separation in the US prior to BrownIn 1951, a class action suit was filed against the Board of Education of the City of Topeka, Kansas in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. The plaintiffs were thirteen Topeka parents on behalf of their twenty children.1 The suit called for the school district to reverse its policy of racial segregation. Separate elementary schools were operated by the Topeka Board of Education under an 1879 Kansas law which permitted (but did not require) districts to maintain separate elementary school facilities for Negro and white students in twelve communities with populations over 15,000.
The plaintiffs had been recruited by the leadership of the Topeka NAACP. Notable among the Topeka NAACP leaders was the chairman McKinley Burnett, Charles Scott, one of three serving as legal counsel for the chapter, and Lucinda Todd. The named plaintiff, Oliver L. Brown worked as a welder for the Santa Fe railroad and was studying for the ministry. He was convinced to join the lawsuit by his childhood friend, Charles Scott. Brown's daughter Linda Brown, a third grader, had to walk five blocks to her school bus stop to ride to Monroe Elementary, her segregated black school two miles away, while Sumner Elementary, a white school, was only five blocks from her house. As directed by the NAACP leadership, the parents each attempted to enroll their children in the closest neighborhood school in the fall of 1951. They were each refused enrollment and directed to the segregated schools.
Linda Brown Thompson later recalled the experience in a 2004 PBS documentary:
- w/. well. like I say we lived in an integrated neighborhood and I had all of these playmates of different nationalities. And so when I found out that day that I might be able to go to their school, I was just thrilled, you know. And I remember walking over to Sumner school with my dad that day and going up the steps of the school and the school looked so big to a smaller child. And I remember going inside and my dad spoke with someone and then he went into the inner office with the principal and they left me out w/. to sit outside with the secretary. And while he was in the inner office, I could hear voices and hear his voice raised, you know, as the conversation went on. And then he immediately came out of the office, took me by the hand and we walked home from the school. I just couldn't understand what was happening because I was so sure that I was going to go to school with Mona and Guinevere, Wanda, and all of my playmates. 2
The Kansas case (Oliver Brown et al v. The Board of Education of Topeka, (Kansas)) was named after Oliver Brown as a legal strategy to have a man at the head of the roster. The twelve plaintiffs were: Oliver Brown, Darlene Brown, Lena Carper, Sadie Emmanuel, Marguerite Emerson, Shirley Fleming, Zelma Henderson, Shirley Hodison, Maude Lawton, Alma Lewis, Iona Richardson, and Lucinda Todd. 3 4
The District Court ruled in favor of the Board of Education, citing the U.S. Supreme Court precedent set in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), which had upheld a state law requiring "separate but equal" segregated facilities for blacks and whites in railway cars. 5 The three-judge District Court found that segregation in public education has a detrimental effect upon negro children, but denied relief on the ground that the negro and white schools in Topeka were substantially equal with respect to buildings, transportation, curricula, and educational qualifications of teachers.6
George E.C. Hayes, Thurgood Marshall, and James Nabrit, congratulating each other, following Supreme Court decision declaring segregation unconstitutionalSupreme Court review
The case of Brown v. Board of Education as heard before the Supreme Court combined four cases: Brown itself, Briggs v. Elliott (filed in South Carolina), Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (filed in Virginia), and Gebhart v. Belton (filed in Delaware). All were NAACP-sponsored cases. The Kansas case was unique among the group in that there was no contention of gross inferiority of the segregated schools physical plant, curriculum, or staff. The district court found substantial equality as to all such factors. The Delaware case was unique in that the District Court judge in Gebhart ordered that the black students be admitted to the white high school due to the substantial harm of segregation and the differences which made the schools separate but not equal.
The NAACP's chief counsel, Thurgood Marshall—who was later appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967—argued the case before the Supreme Court for the plaintiffs. Assistant attorney general Paul Wilson—later distinguished emeritus professor of law at the University of Kansas—conducted the state's ambivalent defense in his first appellate trial.
Local Outcomes
The Topeka middle schools had been integrated since 1941. Topeka High School was integrated from its inception in the late 1800s. The Kansas law permitting segregated schools allowed them only "below the high school level."
Soon after the district court decision, election outcomes and the political climate in Topeka changed. The Board of Education of Topeka began to end segregation in the Topeka elementary schools in August of 1953, integrating two attendance districts. All the Topeka elementary schools were changed to neighborhood attendance centers in January of 1956, although existing students were allowed to continue attending their prior assigned schools at their option. 7 8 9
Plaintiff Zelma Henderson in a 2004 interview recalled that no demonstrations or tumult accompanied desegregation in Topeka's schools:
- They accepted it," she said. "It wasn't too long they integrated the teachers and principals.10
The Topeka Public Schools administration building is named in honor of McKinley Burnett, NAACP chapter president who organized the case.
Monroe Elementary was designated a U.S. National Historic Site unit of the National Park Service on October 26, 1992.
The decision
On 17 May 1954 the Warren Court handed down a unanimous 9-0 decision which stated, in no uncertain terms, that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal."
The 17 May, 1954 decision reversed the Court's previous decision in Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education, (1899)*, which had specifically validated the segregation of public schools. Brown did not, however, result in the immediate desegregation of America's public schools, nor did it mandate desegregation of public accommodations, such as restaurants or bathrooms, that were owned by private parties, which would not be accomplished until the passage of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. However, it was a giant step forwards for the civil rights movement, placing the weight of the Federal Judiciary squarely behind the forces of desegregation.
Brown is often referred to as Brown I, because the following year, 1955, the Court completed its ruling. In this second Brown decision, "Brown II," the Warren Court ordered the states' compliance with Brown I "with all deliberate speed." Brown II was argued by Robert L. Carter, who had earlier initiated some of the cases consolidated at the Supreme Court into Brown I. Even so, formal compliance with the provisions of these two cases was not exped, and in the South most public schools would not be desegregated until about 1970 under the Nixon administration. Nearly twenty years after Brown school desegregation would come to the court's attention again in two cases involving the use of busing to integrate students across school districts: Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971) and Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974).
Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote:
- "Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms." 11
Social implications
Not everyone accepted the Brown v. Board of Education decision. In Virginia, Senator Harry F. Byrd, Sr. organized the Massive Resistance movement that included the closing of schools rather than desegregating them. See, for example, The Southern Manifesto. For more implications of the Brown decision, see Desegregation.
Legal Criticisms
The Brown decision has not been without its critics. Notably, Justice Clarence Thomas (himself an African-American) writing in Missouri v. Jenkins (1995) argues that at the very least, Brown I has been misunderstood by the courts.
- Brown I did not say that "racially isolated" schools were inherently inferior; the harm that it identified was tied purely to de jure segregation, not de facto segregation. Indeed, Brown I itself did not need to rely upon any psychological or social-science research in order to announce the simple, yet fundamental truth that the Government cannot discriminate among its citizens on the basis of racew/w/
- Segregation was not unconstitutional because it might have caused psychological feelings of inferiority. Public school systems that separated blacks and provided them with superior educational resources making blacks "feel" superior to whites sent to lesser schools - would violate the Fourteenth Amendment, whether or not the white students felt stigmatized, just as do school systems in which the positions of the races are reversed. Psychological injury or benefit is irrelevantw/.
- Given that desegregation has not produced the predicted leaps forward in black educational achievement, there is no reason to think that black students cannot learn as well when surrounded by members of their own race as when they are in an integrated environment. (w/.) Because of their "distinctive histories and traditions," black schools can function as the center and symbol of black communities, and provide examples of independent black leadership, success, and achievement. 12
Constitutional originalists including Michael McConnell (professor of Law at the University of Utah, and President George Bush's nominee for a seat on the 10th federal circuit court of appeals), and notably Raoul Berger, in his influential 1977 book "Government by Judiciary," make the case that Brown cannot be defended by reference to the original understanding of the 14th Amendment. They support this reading of the 14th amendment by noting that the Civil Rights Act of 1875 did not ban segregated schools. 13
The case also attracts criticism from more liberal authors. In What 'Brown v. Board of Education' Should Have Said. Jack M. Balkin (prof Yale law) and others write that Chief Justice Warren's reliance on psychological criteria to find a harm against segregated blacks is unnecessary. Quoting Korematsu v. United States they write: "we have developed criteria for evaluating the constitutionality of racial classifications that do not depend upon findings of psychic harm or social science evidence. They are based rather on the principle that distinctions between citizens solely because of their ancestry are by their very nature odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon equality. "
Other criticisms have centered on Brown II's use of the phrase "all deliberate speed."
Brown III
In 1978, Topeka attorneys Richard Jones, Joseph Johnson and Charles Scott Jr. (son of the original Brown team member) persuaded Linda Brown Smith—now with her own children in Topeka schools—to be a plaintiff in reopening Brown. They were concerned about a policy in Topeka Public Schools, which allowed open enrollment. Their fear was that this would lead to further segregation. They believed that with this type of choice, white parents would shift their children to other schools creating predominately African-American and predominately white schools. In 1989 a three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit on 2-1 vote found that the vestiges of segregation remained with respect to student and staff assignment. In 1993 the Supreme Court denied to review the case, returning it to district court Judge Rodgers for implementation.
After a 1994 plan was approved and a bond issue passed, additional elementary magnet schools were opened and district attendance plans redrawn which resulted in the Topeka schools meeting court standards of racial balance by 1998. United status was eventually granted to Topeka Unified School District #501 on July 27, 1999. One of the new magnet schools is named after the Scott family attorneys for their role in the Brown case and civil rights.14
Related cases
- Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932)* - access to counsel
- Hernandez v. Texas, 347 U.S. 475 (1954)* - the Fourteenth Amendment protects those beyond the racial classes of white or Negro,
- Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649 (1944)* - non-white voters in primary elections
- Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948)* - restrictive covenants
- Mendez v. Westminister School District, 64 F.Supp. 544 (1946)* - prohibits segregating Mexican-american children in Ca.
- Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 (1950)* - segregated law schools in Texas
- McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950)* - prohibits segregation in a public institution of higher learning
- Briggs v. Elliott, 347 U.S. 483 * Brown Case #1 - Summerton, South Carolina.
- Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, Civ. A. No. 1333* Brown Case #2 - Prince Edward County, Virginia.
- Gebhart v. Belton, 33 Del. Ch. 144* Brown Case #3 - Claymont, Delaware
- Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954)* Brown companion case - Washington, DC
- NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958)* - privacy of NAACP membership lists, and free association of members
- Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 454 (1960)* - outlawed racial segregation in public transportation
- Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964)* - banned racial discrimination in public places, particularly in public accommodations even in private property.
- Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971)* - established bussing as a solution
- Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974)* - rejected bussing across school district lines.
- List of United States Supreme Court Cases
* See court citation for an explanation of these numbers.
Myths
- The most persistent myth about the case talks about Linda Brown's hardship in attending Monroe. This quotation from a University of Virginia Libraries web site is typical:
-
-
- In 1951 Oliver Brown filed suit against the Topeka, Kansas, Board of Education, after the board refused to allow his daughter, Linda, a third-grader, attend the white school located only a few blocks from their house. To reach the black elementary school, Linda had to walk a dangerous one mile through a railroad yard. UVa web site has since been corrected. The version with the myth can be found on the Internet Archive.
-
- In fact, the Topeka school district provided bus service to black students, a service they did not provide whites, and Linda Brown's five block route to her bus stop was along First Street, adjacent to a railroad track and across it once. It was not across a rail yard, although it was an unpleasant area that was frequented by bums. The children walked along next to the tracks to avoid the abandoned buildings.
- Google maps route from Linda Brown's home to her bus stop. - five blocks, 0.4 miles
- Google maps route to Sumner Elementary - the proposed white school - five blocks, 0.4 miles
-
- (Note: the home was destroyed during construction of an entrance ramp to I-70 in the 1960's.)
- That Oliver Brown was the named plaintiff because he was first alphabetically in the list of plaintiffs.
-
- Darlene Brown (no relation) clearly would have been first in that case.
- That Brown v. Board of Education was the first legal challenge to racially segregated schools in the United States.
-
- In fact, Brown was the eleventh challenge to Kansas 1879 law allowing segregation of elementary schools, the third in Topeka. 15
- That the case was about what school Linda Brown could attend.
-
- In fact the five cases under the heading of Brown represent over 200 plaintiffs, a dozen attorneys and countless community activists working toward the elimination of segregation in the U.S.
See Also
- the "Southern Manifesto," a document written in 1956 by legislators in the United States Congress opposed to racial integration in public places
External links
- Full text of the decision courtesy of Findlaw.com
- Past Imperfect: Brown's Overlooked Architect
- Library of Virginia
- Brown V Board of Education National Historic Site (US Park Service)
- Brown Foundation website
- Interactive map of important Topeka locations involved in the Brown case including Linda Brown's home, bus stop, segregated school and proposed white school.