Brown v. Board of Education

Interposition: means that a state of the U.S. may oppose any federal action it believes encroaches on its power

Nullification: refers to a U.S state refusing to enforce a federal law on Constitutional grounds.

Their historical significance can be traced back to the Brown v. Board of Education trial, where the Supreme Court declared that racial segregation in public schools violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. In response to this case, State legislatures from Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Virginia adopted resolutions of "interposition and nullification," where they could oppose the ruling and refuse to enforce the desegregation of public schools.

Brown vs Board of Education is one of our nation's landmark court cases that was heard by the Supreme Court and the judgement handed down in 1954 that stated that separate public school systems (or educational facilities) for black students and white students is in fact not equal (unequal). I believe that you are asking more about the origin of the case and so I will try to shed some light on that as well. As far as I can understand things, the Brown vs Board of Education decision was larger a decision that came about from the intense years that took place prior to the case which were riddled with a firm belief of the idea of segregation. Initially the case of Plessy vs Ferguson in 1896 was grounds for a lot of the belief that segregation was indeed justifiable through its finding/decision that as long as the two races had separate but ultimately equal facilities to divide them, there was no violation of the Fourteenth Amendment through the practice of segregation (14th Amendment simply stated that no person/citizen could be unfairly treated in any legal aspect, basically it was set in place to give both black and white people the same rights---also know as the Equal Protection Clause). Now if you truly look deeper into the entire issue of segregation and equal rights among the races, there is also the matter of the Dread Scott decision which even before the equal rights initiatives took place the Scott decision boldly declared that black people residing in the nation were not citizens and could never become citizens, and ultimately that meant that they were not afforded the same rights or benefits of citizenship as others could. In that time period one has to realize that our nation was in the process of not only adjusting to the notion of slavery being over but also people were still learning how to even live among one another with a still very divided set of laws, rights, and beliefs.

I would go further into details about all of the elements that play a part in the years prior to the Brown vs Board decision, but if I did so it would probably take a lot more time and space up that ultimately might not give you a better understanding but just seem like a bunch of extra info not relevant to the question at hand. If I can help further please let me know.

Thanks and hope I helped,

onenonlycasper aka austin j.h.

The US Supreme Court heard the consolidated cases of Brown v. Board of Education on direct appeal from the US District Courts, bypassing the US Court of Appeals Circuit Courts, so there was no decision at the intermediate appellate level.

Case Citation:

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)

See Related Questions, below, to read about the Supreme Court decision.

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954)

Brown was argued twice: once in 1952, then again in 1953 after Chief Justice Vinson died and was succeeded by Chief Justice Earl Warren. In 1952, the Respondent's attorney, John Davis argued the following:

• Congress established segregated schools in the District of Columbia (which is under federal control) before, during and after ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, demonstrating those who initiated the Amendment did not intend it to prohibit segregation. Further, of the 30 states that had ratified the Amendment when it was adopted in 1868, 23 maintained segregated schools.
• The issue of desegregation should be a political question (left to Congress), not a judicial one.
• The Court's own precedents supported the "separate but equal" doctrine many times since the Plessy v. Ferguson, (1896) decision. (Davis cited: "...Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education, Gong Lum v. Rice, Berea College v. Kentucky, Sipuel v. Board of Regents, Gaines v. Canada, Sweatt v. Painter, and McLaurin v. Oklahoma, and there may be others for all I know, certainly this Court has spoken in the most clear and unmistakable terms to the effect that this segregation is not unlawful. Cumming v. Richmond County Board of Education, Gong Lum v. Rice, Berea College v. Kentucky, Sipuel v. Board of Regents, Gaines v. Canada, Sweatt v. Painter, and McLaurin v. Oklahoma, and there may be others for all I know, certainly this Court has spoken in the most clear and unmistakable terms to the effect that this segregation is not unlawful.")
• Davis claimed the Clark's doll test was unscientific, and discussed a replication of their study conducted by another expert witness, identified only as Trager, who conducted the test on Philadelphia school children in integrated schools and found their preference for the white doll and belief that the African-American doll was bad was more extreme than the opinions of the Southern, segregated children.
• Davis quoted the opinion of W. E. B. Dubois, an African-American intellectual who opposed desegregation: "It is difficult to think of anything more important for the development of a people than proper training for their children; and yet I have repeatedly seen wise and loving colored parents take infinite pains to force their little children into schools where the white children, white teachers, and white parents despised and resented the dark child, make mock of it, neglected or bullied it, and literally rendered its life a living hell. Such parents want their children to "fight" this thing out-but, dear God, at what a cost!"

  He goes on:

  "We shall get a finer, better balance of spirit; an infinitely more capable and rounded personality by putting children in schools where they are wanted, and where they are happy and inspired, than in thrusting them into hells where they are ridiculed and hated."

• Parents should have an opportunity to be consulted and determine whether they wanted their children in an integrated school.

In 1953, Davis added the following arguments:

• Some southern school districts (for example, Clarendon, SC) were predominantly black and enjoyed newer schools and better facilities than the minority white population.
• Integration would create a situation in that district where the classes were integrated 27:3, with the majority African-American, which he didn't believe would be useful to anyone.
• Race and racial tensions had existed for "some 60 centuries," an argument he used to deny segregation was caused by, or reinforced, racism.
• Individual states and school boards should be allowed to determine for themselves whether to integrate, because they had a better understanding of community-level issues.

Public schools were gradually desegregated, or integrated.

This didn't happen as quickly as some people believe because the order for desegregation wasn't formulated until the year after the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, in Brown v. Board of Education II, 349 US 294 (1955).

In Brown II, the Supreme Court declined to set a firm deadline for desegregation, so many school districts, particularly in the South, delayed making changes for years, petitioned the court for exception and extensions, and attempted to circumvent the order by redistricting. A few cities, like Little Rock, Arkansas, openly defied the Supreme Court, allowing bigoted members of the community to block integration with intimidation and threats of violence.

President Eisenhower responded to the crisis in Little Rock by sending a National Guard troop to protect the nine African-American students enrolled at the "white" high school, but otherwise did little to enforce the Court's decision.

Desegregation didn't begin in earnest until Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Case Citation:

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954)

For more information, see Related Questions, below.

Brown v. Board of Education, (1954) was initiated in 1950, in Topeka, Kansas, and moved through the lower courts for two years before the Supreme Court granted plaintiffs' petition for writ of certiorari on October 8, 1952. The Court combined Brown with a South Carolina school segregation case, Briggs et al. v. Elliott et al., and noted there were additional cases in appellate court that were likely to be added later (two more were added, for a total of four; a fifth case was heard separately because it concerned segregation in the District of Columbia, federal territory).

The four cases consolidated underBrown:

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954) (Kansas)

Briggs v. Elliot (South Carolina)*

Davis v. County Board of Education of Prince Edward County (Virginia)

Gebhart v. Belton (Delaware)

Companion case, heard separately:

Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 US 497 (1954)

*Briggs v. Elliot, 342 US 350 (1952) originally came before the court in 1952, but the decision was vacated and the case remanded back to US District Court for disposition.

Thurgood Marshall, Chief Counsel for the NAACP, first argued the case on December 9, 1952, but was compelled to repeat his argument a year later, on December 8, 1953, because the Justices required the lawyers write briefs of their opinions on whether Congress had intended the Constitution to provide for segregated schools.

Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the court's unanimous verdict on May 17, 1954, declaring segregation in education a violation of the students' 14th Amendment guarantee of Equal Protection under the law.

Case Citation:

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954)

The United States Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, (1954), was based on the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Although the Due Process Cause was probably also applicable, Chief Justice Earl Warren explained it was unnecessary for the Court to review the case in terms of both clauses, because the Equal Protection Clause was sufficient to declare segregation in public school unconstitutional.

Case Citation:

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954)

For more information, see Related Questions, below.

Legal Bluebook

The MLA now recommends using Legal Bluebook format for case citations.

First citation: Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954). Print.

Subsequent citations: Brown, 347 US at 485. (for example)

Citation dissected

1. Short title or caption (in italics)
2. Volume number
3. U.S. (abbreviation for US Reports)
4. Beginning page number
5. Page being referenced
6. Year decided (in parentheses)
7. Period

Subsequent citations typically drop the Respondent's name (with a few exceptions), the page the case starts on, and the year decided.

Old-Style MLA Format

If, for some reason, you're required to use the old MLA format, the citation is as follows:

Brown v. Board of Educ. 347 U. S. Reports (17 May 1954): 483-500. Print.

The US Supreme Court overturned the "separate but equal" precedent established in Plessy v. Ferguson, (1896), when they declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional in Brown v. Board of Education, (1954).

A precedent is a court decision used as a model for future decisions. In 1896, the Supreme Court decided racial segregation was constitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment, as long as African-Americans were provided equal services and facilities (which rarely happened). The courts upheld the precedent established in Plessy for nearly 60 years.

Brown v. Board of Education, (1954) had nothing to do with overturning a US President, but the two words (precedent and president) are often confused.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483, (1954) was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court unanimously ruled segregation in the public schools was unconstitutional.

Chief Justice Earl Warren, in writing the Court opinion, declared "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal" because they violated the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause. This overturned the 1896 Supreme Court ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson, which held the concept of "separate but equal" was constitutional.

Explanation

Brown v. Board of Education was a class action suit representing the collective rights of thirteen Topeka, Kansas, parents and their twenty-one children. The Court consolidated four other cases into Brown: Briggs v. Elliot (South Carolina); Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County (Virginia); Gebhart v. Belton (Delaware); and Bolling v. Sharpe (Washington, D.C.).

All five cases, although originating in different states and representing slightly different facts, were sponsored by the NAACP, and argued before the Court by their Chief Counsel, Thurgood Marshall, who was later appointed to the Supreme Court, in 1967.

The cases, together, illustrated different aspects of problems inherent in de jure segregation (segregation ordered by law, rather than by uncontrollable circumstances). The Topeka case did not allege, as commonly believed, that the African-American school was inferior in quality, but that a segregated education deprived the minority of equal educational opportunity and was psychologically damaging because it promoted a feeling of inferiority among the African-American children.

On the opening page of the Court's opinion, Chief Justice Warren laid out the following:

"(c) Where a State has undertaken to provide an opportunity for an education in its public schools, such an opportunity is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. P. 493.

"(d) Segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprives children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal. Pp. 493-494.

"(e) The "separate but equal" doctrine adopted in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, has no place in the field of public education. P. 495. [347 U.S. 483, 484]..."

(See Related Links for full opinion)

History of Linda Brown and the Topeka School District

Linda Brown, a bright 8-year-old third-grader living in an integrated neighborhood in the Topeka School District, attended a Monroe Elementary, a segregated primary school for African-American children. In order to get to school, she had to walk seven blocks to a bus stop, then ride a bus one mile to school, bypassing Sumner Elementary, an all-white school just five blocks from her house.

The Topeka School District was unusual in that only its elementary schools were segregated, a practice allowed by an 1879 Kansas law that permitted, but did not require, school districts to maintain segregated schools in towns and cities with populations over 15,000.

The district's middle school had been integrated in 1941; the high school had been integrated since it opened in 1871, but kept its sports program and social activities separate.

McKinley Burnett, head of the local NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, a social activism group) had already decided to fight school segregation, and began recruiting parents from the local community. Oliver Brown's friend, Charles Scott, a Topeka civil rights attorney, urged Brown to participate. The lawsuit bearing Oliver Brown's name included twelve other parents and their 21 children. The NAACP sponsored the suit, providing free legal advice and counsel to the Topeka families.

NAACP leaders encouraged the families to attempt to enroll their children at nearby Sumner Elementary in the Fall of 1950, fully expecting their enrollment would be denied. And it was.

A three-judge panel initially heard the case in District court, and found in favor of the school district, citing the U.S. Supreme Court's 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson. While the panel acknowledged segregation in education had a negative effect on African-American children, it refused to grant relief under the law, stating black and white schools in Topeka were substantially similar in quality, curriculum and teacher qualifications.

The NAACP followed the appeals process all the way to the Supreme Court, where Marshall was compelled to argue the case twice, once in 1952 and once in 1953, because the Supreme Court Justices wanted briefs from each of the five attorneys answering five questions regarding their opinions as to whether Congress had public school segregation in mind when they ratified the 14th Amendment.

In deciding for the plaintiffs in Brown, Chief Justice Warren eloquently concluded:

"To separate them [children in grade and high schools] from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone…"

After the landmark decision, Topeka integrated its elementary schools with no protest from teachers or parents. As one plaintiff, Zelma Henderson, remembers:

"They accepted it," she said. "It wasn't too long until they integrated the teachers and principals."

For more detailed information on the case, see the Related Link, below. the civil rights movement.

Case Citation:

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)