Basis of Equal Rights for Blacks: the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause
Summary: Says that the law must treat those who are similarly situated in the same manner.
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Separate but Equal Cases
Plessy v. Ferguson: Separate But Equal
http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/307/
Homer Plessy, a biracial man challenged a Louisiana law requiring railroad companies in the state to provide "equal but separate accommodations for the white and colored race." The court decided 'separate but equal' facilities were constitutional. This ruling was extended to include schools. Justice John Marshall Harlan was the sole dissenting opinion and he wrote "Our Constitution is color-blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among its citizens."
Separate But Not Equal: Sweatt v. Painter
http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/375/
In 1938, the Supreme Court faced another challenge to a state's segregation
law when Lloyd Gaines, a black student, sought admission to the white-only State
University of Missouri Law School. Pending development of a black-only law
school, state law provided that the university could pay for black students to
attend school in a neighboring state.
Although the Court affirmed the
Plessy decision, it found Missouri's separate out-of-state facilities to not
be equal. Chief Justice
Hughes explained that the law permitted white law students to attend school
in-state, but compelled black law students to seek education out-of-state.
Separate but Equal doctrine breaks down more: Gaines v. Canada:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=305&invol=337
The Supreme Court ruled that Missouri could not satisfy its obligation to provide equal protection by sending an African American resident to an out-of-state law school and that Lloyd Gaines must thus be admitted to the all-white University of Missouri School of Law. This case was the beginning of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund's effort to chip away at the separate-but-equal doctrine. The State of Missouri set up a separate inferior law school in 1939, forcing the NAACP back to court. However early in 1939 Gaines disappeared never to surface again, some suspected foul play others thought he accepted a bribe. Whatever happened the NAACP was forced to drop the case because it not longer had a plaintiff.
*McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=339&invol=637
Significant Points: On January 28, 1948, a black retired
professor, George McLaurin, applied to the University of Oklahoma to pursue a
Doctorate in Education. School authorities were required to deny him admission
solely because of his race under Oklahoma statutes which made it a misdemeanor
to maintain or operate, teach, or attend a school at which both whites and
African Americans were enrolled or taught. McLaurin filed a complaint to gain
admission. On October 6, the Court for the Western District of Oklahoma found
unconstitutional those parts of the Oklahoma statute that denied McLaurin
admission. With this ruling the University's Board of Regents voted to admit
McLaurin, but on a segregated basis.
On October 13, 1948, McLaurin entered the University. He sat at a designated
desk on the mezzanine level of Bizzell Library rather than the regular reading
room, at a desk in an anteroom adjoining Classroom 104 in Carnegie Hall, and ate
at a separate time from the white students in the cafeteria. McLaurin once again
filed suit with the District Court. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that as
a result of McLaurin's segregation he was "handicapped in his pursuit of
effective graduate instruction. Such restrictions impair and inhibit his ability
to study, to engage in discussion and exchange view with other students, and in
general to learn his professions." The case became the climax of the NAACP's
plans between 1930 and 1950 to overturn the separate but equal doctrine in
public education by demanding equality in graduate and professional schools.
Ewing’s case: Spencer v. Kugler (1972)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=404&invol=1027
Vivian Spencer brought a class action suit against the state of NJ, claiming that the segregation in schools were a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was dismissed, saying that there was no violation. Plaintiff appealed up to the Supreme Court of the United States, where on appeal the court noted that most blacks were deprived of decent education and that maintaining separate facilities based on race was a violation of Brown v. BOE, which is binding precedent in all jurisdictions.
Affirmative Action Cases
Taxman v. Piscataway Board of Education
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/briefs/pisc.htm
In Taxman v. Board of Education of Township of Piscataway (1997), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that under Title VII, a school board could not lawfully lay off a white teacher, and retain a black teacher with equal seniority to promote faculty diversity. The school board approved the layoff to retain the only African American teacher in a high school business department. Rejecting the diversity argument, the Third Circuit held that remedying past discrimination is the only justification that can validate race-conscious programs under Title VII. After the Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal, the case was settled out of court.
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=438&invol=265
In a landmark 1978 decision, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the Supreme Court ruled that colleges and universities may administer carefully designed admissions programs that to some extent take race and ethnicity into account, to foster diversity of their student bodies. At the same time, the Court held that quotas and set-asides in admissions are illegal. On the authority of Bakke and other court decisions and laws, higher education institutions — in such areas as admissions, student aid, and faculty recruitment — energetically pursued the values inherent in a racially and ethnically diverse academic community, while seeking to comply with legal developments that have complicated and at times obscured the legal landscape.
Gratz v. Bollinger/Grutter v. Bollinger
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C200306%5CPOL20030623d.html
In Gratz, the court supported the University of Michigan’s practice of factoring in race in the admissions process, saying that a diverse student body is a good idea; however, the point system they used did in fact give minorities too much of an advantage. In Grutter, a different judge of the same circuit as Gratz found the practice unconstitutional, saying that this practice excludes minorities from competition and that setting aside a pseudo “quota” of minorities is not fair. The Supreme Court, however, overturned this decision, saying that race is not a predominant factor in the school’s admissions’ criteria, and that the Bakke decision stands as precedent.
Boston’s Children First, et al. v. Boston School Committee, et al.
http://www.julyfourth.net/CPCRcases.htm
Since the 1970’s, Boston’s school system appeared to many as being segregated, and that blacks and other minorities were receiving inadequate education compared to whites. Boston’s original intent was to bus kids around so that schools would have a more diverse student body, but over time the schools became extremely segregated with white kids going to the better schools and minorities going to worse schools. This case forced Boston to redo their assignment plan for kids, however, the children already placed in a school under the old laws will remain in that school. Additionally, some of the children at predominately white schools have been forced to attend other schools so more minorities may attend.
Summaries for many other cases about affirmative action:
http://www.acenet.edu/washington/affirmative_action/2001/legal.update.html
Related State Cases
Korematsu v. United States 323 U.S. 214 No. 22
This concerns the wartime evacuation of Japanese-Americans from the West Coast in which the Court said that because only a single ethnic-racial group was involved, the measure was ''immediately suspect'' and subject to ''rigid scrutiny.'' A racial classification, regardless of alleged motivation, is presumptively invalid and can be upheld only upon an extraordinary justification. A measure which does not draw a distinction explicitly on race but which does draw a line between those who seek to use the law to do away with or modify racial discrimination and those who oppose such efforts does in fact create an explicit racial classification and is constitutionally suspect. Decided on December 18, 1944. source: Lexis Nexis (subscription required)
Missouri v. Jenkins 491 U.S. 274 No. 88-64
This is a case brought against the board of education and other defendants for allegedly causing racial segregation in the schools of the city's metropolitan area. The state had determined that the school was operating under a segregated system. The state found that there were no suitable programs made available to enable the desegregation of schools. The district court ordered a desegregation plan for the city to employ immediately. Decided on June 12, 1995. source: Lexis Nexis (subscription required)
Milliken v. Bradley 418 U.S. 717 No. 73-434
This deals with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, entering an order requiring, in addition to pupil assignment, that the Detroit School Board and the state defendants incorporate certain recompensing and remedial programs, with the cost of these programs to be equally borne by the Board and the state to further desegregate the current programs offered by the schools.. Decided on June 27, 1977. source: Lexis Nexis (subscription required)
Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 402 U.S. 1 No. 281
In this case, the District Court approved a desegregation plan for the school, but after the passage of several years, the school system, which included approximately 29% Negro students and 71% white students, remained substantially segregated. The District Court then proceeded to implicate another plan that would further help the desegregation process and provide a more equal ratio between black and white students and teachers. Decided on April 20, 1971.
source: Lexis Nexis (subscription required)
Green v. County School Board of New Kent 391 U.S. 430 No. 695
This deals with the question of whether, under all the circumstances, a county school board's use of a "freedom-of-choice" plan, which allows a pupil to choose his or her own public school, constitutes sufficient compliance with the board's responsibility to create admissions with no racial bias present. The school system in question had only two schools and under the segregated system initially established and maintained, one was for white children and the other for black children. The court decided that this establishment was not acceptable in terms of the new desegregation plans. Decided on May 27, 1968.
source: Lexis Nexis (subscription required)
Return to the Archive home page
Return to the Archive media page