Brown v. Board of Education

Answer 1:

It probably would not be very different than it is now. Major historical events like that do not really alter the course of history, they just accelerate or decelerate it. At the time of the court case, there were major racial conflicts in the country that would have came to a boil and required changes to be made regardless of how the Supreme Court ruled. A good case can be made that the decision's prohibition of segregation in schools had major effects on the speed at which the racist laws and attitudes at the time were changed. It and other Supreme Court decisions prohibiting racist practices may have even pushed the civil rights campaign ahead as much as a decade faster than it would have otherwise. But regardless what would have happened with these cases, we would eventually have had essentually the same alterations of history has occured. There were numerous sociatal factors that caused a push towards integration and reduced discrimination and racism. The outcome of a few court decisions a half century ago were not going to determine what type of society we live in today.

Answer 2:

There is some truth to historical trends. However, in this case, the Supreme Court got it right. Even after their ruling, note that it took awhile. I could easily see some states being "separate but equal" now, if they had not ruled as they did.

And I doubt we'd have a black President. Not without all the voters having had an opportunity growing up to see that black kids and white kids could be together, and that both were as smart.

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

There were no "witnesses for the defense" in Brown v. Board of Education. A witness for the defense is someone who testifies in the interest of a defendant in a criminal trial. Brown started as a class action suit, a civil case where a group of plaintiffs with a common complaint take an entity (a person, business, organization, government agency, etc.) to court in order to change the circumstances causing the complaint.

In Brown, the Board of Education of Topeka won the case at the trial stage in US District Court. The NAACP, which represented the families trying to end segregation in the Topeka, Kansas, school district eventually appealed the case to the US Supreme Court. There is no trial, and no testimony given, in an appeal.

Chief Justice Warren didn't make an anonymous (meaning without revealing names) decision, the Supreme Court reached a unanimous decision (meaning they all agreed) in Brown v. Board of Education, (1954).

The justices wanted to take a strong, united stance against segregation by issuing a single opinion signed by everyone. This sent a clear message to those who resisted desegregation that "separate but equal" was "inherently unequal" and would no longer be sanctioned by the Supreme Court.

The decision also opened the door to challenges of Jim Crow laws, and other discriminatory practices, with the expectation the Court would dismantle the institution of racism (or at least try).

Case Citation:

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

The Supreme Court declared racial segregation in education unconstitutional in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954) (which was actually a consolidation of four separate cases against school boards across the country). While Brown is undoubtedly the best-known case dealing with the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, it was not the first case to help dismantle the "separate but equal" doctrine establish by Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), nor was it the last.

Segregation in the schools had already been challenged ten times in the state of Kansas by the time the NAACP Legal Defense Fund stepped in to organize Brown. In fact, Brown was the third discrimination suit filed against the Topeka school district, but only the first to be tried in Federal court. Two earlier cases went before the Kansas Supreme Court:

Wright v. Board of Education (1929), sought an injunction against busing African-American students long distances in order to attend "colored" schools, when other, "whites-only" schools were much closer. In this case, the State held that the transportation was adequate and not sufficient cause to change state law.

Graham v. Board of Education of the City of Topeka (1941) held that a particular African-American school was not comparable to the whites-only middle school, and issued a writ of mandamus compelling Topeka to admit the African-American student who brought suit against the district to the white school. This decision was not generalized to the entire population.

Some other successful and partially successful cases supporting desegregation prior to Brown include:

• Buchanan v. Warley, 245 US 60 (1917)

  The Court unanimously struck down a Louisville, KY, municipal ordinance that required residential segregation by race. The law prohibited blacks or whites from living on blocks where members of one race occupied the majority of homes. The Court struck down the statute because it destroyed the right of the individual to acquire, enjoy and dispose of his property, which right is protected by the 14th Amendment. (While this set a valuable legal precedent, developers and homeowner associations circumvented the law by setting up association-based restrictive covenants.)

• Harmon v. Tyler, 273 US 688 (1927)

  Based on the precedent set in Buchanan v. Warley (above) the Supreme Court held that cities could not segregate housing by denying building permits to African-Americans who wanted to construct a home in a "white" neighborhood.

• Powell et al., v. State of Alabama, 287 US 45 (1932)

  Overturned the convictions of nine African-American men accused of raping two white women, on the grounds that the state had discriminated against them by providing inadequate legal counsel.

• Norris v. Alabama, 294 US 587 (1935)

  Overturned the convictions of the defendants in Powell on retrial on the grounds that African-Americans had been systematically and arbitrarily excluded from the jury list due to race, which the Court ruled was a violation of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause.

• Nixon v. Herndon, 273 US 536 (1927)

  Struck down a Texas law forbidding African-Americans from voting in the Texas Democratic Primary. This was one of four cases challenging the statute.

• Nixon v. Condon, 286 US 73 (1932)

  Struck down the new Texas statute subsequent to the one invalidated by Nixon v. Herndon. This statute allowed the Texas Democratic Party to bar African-Americans by creating a resolution allowing only whites to vote in the Primary.

  (The Democratic Party responded to this ruling by barring African-Americans from participating in the nominating conventions, rather than the Primary, which had the effect of continuing a policy of exclusion.)

• Murray v. Maryland, 169 Md. 478 (1937) (Case heard in Maryland Supreme Court)

  Overturned a rejected law school application from an African-American graduate of Amherst College because his rejection was based on race. The Court declared that "Compliance with the Constitution can not be deferred at the will of the state," and ruled that standards applied for legal education must be equal. (Although this was an important decision, the impact didn't reach beyond Maryland because the state of Maryland didn't appeal the verdict.)

• Missouri ex rel Gaines v. Canada, 305 US 337 (1938)

  After a qualified African-American student was denied admission to the University of Missouri's all-white law school and offered no in-state alternative, the Court ruled the practice constituted state-practiced discrimination in violation of the 14th Amendment.

• Mills v. Board of Education of Anne Arundel County 30 F. Supp 245 (1939)

  Challenge to a Maryland statute that set lower minimum salaries for teachers employed at "colored" schools than for teachers employed at "all-white" schools. The Court ordered Maryland to cease salary discrimination based on race (but failed to order the Board not to pay black teachers less than white teachers).

• Hansberry v. Lee, 311 US 32 (1940)

  Rejected a restrictive covenant prohibiting African-Americans from living in the exclusive "white" suburb of Hyde Park, Chicago, on the basis of a technicality, but did not render all restrictive covenants illegal.

• Smith v. Allwright, 321 US 666 (1944)

  Based on their decision about the electoral status of political parties in the United States v. Classic (1941), ruled that African-Americans had as much right to participate in Primary elections as in General elections, and that any rules limiting their participating violated their constitutional rights. This was a landmark civil rights case.

• Morgan v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 328 US 373 (1946)

  Held that state laws segregating seating in interstate travel (on buses, trains, etc.) were unconstitutional. (Unfortunately, many companies - especially those in the deep south - ignored the ruling.)

• Bob-Lo Excursion Co. v. People of the State of Michigan,333 US 28 (1948)

  Ruled that a Canadian-owned ferry company operating in Michigan prohibiting African-Americans from using their transportation services was a violation of Michigan's Civil Rights law, and unconstitutional. This was a major milestone in the Supreme Court indicating its willingness to protect the civil rights of African-Americans.

• Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 US 1 (1948)

  Held that courts could not enforce in equity (allow monetary damages) restrictive covenants banning African-Americans and Asians (or other legally defined minorities) from purchasing a home or living in any neighborhood. Held that private restrictive covenants were not necessarily a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, but that they could not be legally enforced. In other words, the Court declined to impose constitutional restrictions on private individuals. This is still considered a landmark case.

• Sweat v. Painter, 339 US 629 (1950)

  An African-American male applied to the University of Texas Law School in 1946 and was rejected due to race. Texas responded the subsequent suit by building a separate law school specifically for African-Americans. The Court ruled this was not an equal accommodation because it lacked the faculty reputation, alumni prestige, and respect of the legal community. This landmark case struck the first significant blow to Plessy v. Furguson(1896) by putting an end to statutory segregation.

• McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education,339 US 637 (1950)

  McLaurin successfully sued for admission to a PhD program at the University of Oklahoma, but was relegated to segregated classroom, library, and cafeteria areas reserved for African-Americans, and was prevented from co-mingling with whites on campus. The Supreme Court ruled the 14th Amendment precludes differences in treatment by the state on the basis of race.

• Barrows v. Jackson, 346 US 249 (1953)

  Pursuant to Shelley v. Kraemer, (1948), upheld a state court decision forbidding use of race-based restrictive covenants from being used to recover monetary damages from a party in breach of the covenant. Also ruled that an individual has standing to challenge the constitutionality of the practice without being personally damaged, because the rule to deny standing is outweighed by the need to protect the fundamental rights of an entire class.

• Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 US 497 (1954) (Decided the same day as Brown v. Board of Ed)

  The Court used the Fifth Amendment guarantee of due process to ban discrimination in a federal case of educational discrimination originally filed in the District of Columbia. Declared that the Constitution would not impose a lesser duty on the federal government than on the state governments.

• Muir v. Louisville, Park Theatrical Association, 347 US 971 (1954)

  A Louisville, KY, city-owned amphitheater refused to sell a ticket to an African-American because of his race. The Court ruled the principles in Brown extended to all public facilities, per the 14th Amendment.

Each of these cases chipped away at Plessy v. Ferguson(1896) and the Jim Crow laws, and laid the foundation for the Court's decision in Brown, just as Brown laid a foundation for later civil rights cases.

It should be noted that, while the ruling in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) found segregation in education unconstitutional, it did not specify the means by which desegregation was to be accomplished. That issue was addressed, to an extent, the following year in Brown v. Board of Education (II), 349 US 294, (1955). Brown II asked the question, "What means should be used to implement the principles announced in Brown I?"

Topeka City Schools cooperated with the ruling and integrated their classrooms without resistance. Other school districts, however, refused to comply with the decision, mounted legal challenges, requested time extensions, claimed financial hardship, and found various other devious ways around the Browndecisions.

The federal government did not begin enforcing desegregation until Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Brown v. Board of Education II, 349 US 294 (1955)

Answer

Yes. The Court declared segregation unconstitutional in Brown v. Board of Education, 374 US 483 (1954), and ordered integration, overseen by the US District Courts, in Brown v. Board of Education (II), 349 US 294 (1955).

Explanation

The US Supreme Court first declared segregation in public education unconstitutional in 1954, in the consolidated cases heard under the caption Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954). This overturned the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson,(1896), that allowed "separate but equal" accommodations for African-Americans in most areas of life, including education. In Brown, the Supreme Court determined that "separated but equal" wasn't equal, and unfairly branded African-American students as inferior.

The Court recognized, however, that the logistics of integration would be difficult in many school districts, so they set a future date to determine the practical aspects of their earlier ruling. In Brown v. Board of Education (II), 349 US 294 (1955), commonly known as Brown II, the Court ordered the US District Courts to oversee application of the mandate requiring public schools to integrate with "all deliberate speed."

Although most people consider 1954 the year the Court ordered integration, the mandate wasn't handed down until 1955, in the separate, but related, Brown IIcase.