Brown v. Board of Education

Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society.

Supreme Court of United States.

487*487 In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis.

Argument was heard in the 1952 Term, and reargument was heard this Term on certain questions propounded by the Court.[3]

What others in Congress and the state legislatures had in mind cannot be determined with any degree of certainty.

"It ordains that no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, or deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court.347 U.S. 483 (1954) BROWN ET AL. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF TOPEKA ET AL. No. 1. Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 9, 1952. Reargued December 8, 1953. Decided May 17, 1954. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS.[*] 484*484 Robert L. Carter argued the cause for appellants in No. 1 on the original argument and on the reargument. Thurgood Marshall argued the cause for appellants in No. 2 on the o

Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments.

487*487 In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis.

494*494 Such considerations apply with added force to children in grade and high schools.

They are premised on different facts and different local conditions, but a common legal question justifies their consideration together in this consolidated opinion.[1]

487*487 In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis.

487*487 In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis.

487*487 In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis.

487*487 In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis.

But elsewhere in the North segregation in public education has persisted in some communities until recent years.

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.

In each instance, 488*488 they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race.

In each instance, 488*488 they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race.

In each instance, 488*488 they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race.

We must look instead to the effect of segregation itself on public education.

Under that doctrine, equality of treatment is accorded when the races are provided substantially equal facilities, even though these facilities be separate.

This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Only in this way can it be determined if segregation in public schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws.

The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not "equal" and cannot be made "equal," and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws.

The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not "equal" and cannot be made "equal," and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws.

As a consequence, it is not surprising that there should be so little in the history of the Fourteenth Amendment relating to its intended effect on public education.

In this Court, there have been six cases involving the "separate but equal" doctrine in the field of public education.[7]

We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place.

We have now announced that such segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws.

Under that doctrine, equality of treatment is accorded when the races are provided substantially equal facilities, even though these facilities be separate.

Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.

The court found the Negro school inferior in physical plant, curricula, and transportation, and ordered the defendants forthwith to provide substantially equal curricula and transportation and to "proceed with all reasonable diligence and dispatch to remove" the inequality in physical plant.

Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.

The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not "equal" and cannot be made "equal," and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws.

Assuming it is decided that segregation in public schools violates the Fourteenth Amendment "(a) would a decree necessarily follow providing that, within the limits set by normal geographic school districting, Negro children should forthwith be admitted to schools of their choice, or "(b) may this Court, in the exercise of its equity powers, permit an effective gradual adjustment to be brought about from existing segregated systems to a system not based on color distinctions?

The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not "equal" and cannot be made "equal," and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the laws.

Compulsory school attendance laws were not generally adopted until after the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, and it was not until 1918 that such laws were in force in all the states.

Even in the North, the conditions of public education did not approximate those existing today.

It covered exhaustively consideration of the Amendment in Congress, ratification by the states, then existing practices in racial segregation, and the views of proponents and opponents of the Amendment.

Their opponents, just as certainly, were antagonistic to both the letter and the spirit of the Amendments and wished them to have the most limited effect.

It is apparent that such segregation has long been a nationwide problem, not merely one of sectional concern.

The most avid proponents of the post-War Amendments undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among "all persons born or naturalized in the United States."

The most avid proponents of the post-War Amendments undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among "all persons born or naturalized in the United States."

The most avid proponents of the post-War Amendments undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among "all persons born or naturalized in the United States."

The most avid proponents of the post-War Amendments undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among "all persons born or naturalized in the United States."

Their opponents, just as certainly, were antagonistic to both the letter and the spirit of the Amendments and wished them to have the most limited effect.

We must look instead to the effect of segregation itself on public education.

What others in Congress and the state legislatures had in mind cannot be determined with any degree of certainty.

What others in Congress and the state legislatures had in mind cannot be determined with any degree of certainty.

The low status of Negro education in all sections of the country, both before and immediately after the War, is described in Beale, A History of Freedom of Teaching in American Schools (1941), 112-132, 175-195.

Education of Negroes was almost nonexistent, and practically all of the race were illiterate.

In fact, any education of Negroes was forbidden by law in some states.

Today, in contrast, many Negroes have achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in the business and professional world.

Today, in contrast, many Negroes have achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in the business and professional world.

Today, in contrast, many Negroes have achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in the business and professional world.

Today, in contrast, many Negroes have achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in the business and professional world.

Today, in contrast, many Negroes have achieved outstanding success in the arts and sciences as well as in the business and professional world.

It is true that public school education at the time of the Amendment had advanced further in the North, but the effect of the Amendment on Northern States was generally ignored in the congressional debates.

The curriculum was usually rudimentary; ungraded schools were common in rural areas; the school term was but three months a year in many states; and compulsory school attendance was virtually unknown.

Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society.

Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society.

The words of the amendment, it is true, are prohibitory, but they contain a necessary implication of a positive immunity, or right, most valuable to the colored race,—the right to exemption from unfriendly legislation against them distinctively as colored,—exemption from legal discriminations, implying inferiority in civil society, lessening the security of their enjoyment of the rights which others enjoy, and discriminations which are steps towards reducing them to the condition of a subject ra

The court found the Negro school inferior in physical plant, curricula, and transportation, and ordered the defendants forthwith to provide substantially equal curricula and transportation and to "proceed with all reasonable diligence and dispatch to remove" the inequality in physical plant.

But the court sustained the validity of the contested provisions and denied the plaintiffs admission to the white schools during the equalization program.

The court found the Negro school inferior in physical plant, curricula, and transportation, and ordered the defendants forthwith to provide substantially equal curricula and transportation and to "proceed with all reasonable diligence and dispatch to remove" the inequality in physical plant.

Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools involved in each of the cases.

Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools involved in each of the cases.

Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools involved in each of the cases.

Our decision, therefore, cannot turn on merely a comparison of these tangible factors in the Negro and white schools involved in each of the cases.

Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system."[10]

Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our democratic society.

Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.

Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.

"Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children.

Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system."[10]

Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system."[10]

We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place.

Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.

Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.

In the South Carolina case, the court below found that the defendants were proceeding "promptly and in good faith to comply with the court's decree."

They brought this action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to enjoin enforcement of provisions in the state constitution and statutory code which require the segregation of Negroes and whites in public schools.

They brought this action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to enjoin enforcement of provisions in the state constitution and statutory code which require the segregation of Negroes and whites in public schools.

They brought this action in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas to enjoin enforcement of a Kansas statute which permits, but does not require, cities of more than 15,000 population to maintain separate school facilities for Negro and white students.

They brought this action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to enjoin enforcement of provisions in the state constitution and statutory code which require the segregation of Negroes and whites in public schools.

They brought this action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to enjoin enforcement of provisions in the state constitution and statutory code which require the segregation of Negroes and whites in public schools.

They brought this action in the Delaware Court of Chancery to enjoin enforcement of provisions in the state constitution and statutory code which require the segregation of Negroes and whites in public schools.

The court found that the Negro schools were inferior to the white schools and ordered the defendants to begin immediately to equalize the facilities.

The court found that the Negro schools were inferior to the white schools and ordered the defendants to begin immediately to equalize the facilities.

This Court vacated the District Court's judgment and remanded the case for the purpose of obtaining the court's views on a report filed by the defendants concerning the progress made in the equalization program.

In the country as a whole, but particularly in the South, the War virtually stopped all progress in public education.

Although the demand for free public schools followed substantially the same pattern in both the North and the South, the development in the South did not begin to gain momentum until about 1850, some twenty years after that in the North.

Although the demand for free public schools followed substantially the same pattern in both the North and the South, the development in the South did not begin to gain momentum until about 1850, some twenty years after that in the North.

Although the demand for free public schools followed substantially the same pattern in both the North and the South, the development in the South did not begin to gain momentum until about 1850, some twenty years after that in the North.

The reasons for the somewhat slower development in the South (e. g., the rural character of the South and the different regional attitudes toward state assistance) are well explained in Cubberley, supra, at 408-423.

Segregation in Boston public schools was eliminated in 1855.

But elsewhere in the North segregation in public education has persisted in some communities until recent years.

It is apparent that such segregation has long been a nationwide problem, not merely one of sectional concern.

Similarly, in the Gong Lum case, the plaintiff, a child of Chinese descent, contended only that state authorities had misapplied the doctrine by classifying him with Negro children and requiring him to attend a Negro school.

Similarly, in the Gong Lum case, the plaintiff, a child of Chinese descent, contended only that state authorities had misapplied the doctrine by classifying him with Negro children and requiring him to attend a Negro school.