Brown v.Board of Education

Views:
 
Category: Education
     
 

Presentation Description

Legal Enrichment Summary

Comments

Presentation Transcript

Brown v. Board of Education Group 3:

3/11/2013 Group 3 1 Brown v. Board of Education Group 3 Education 585 Azusa Pacific University

Project Goals:

3/11/2013 Group 3 2 Project Goals Development of the Case Appellate Process Supreme Court Decision Decision to Practice

Development of Brown v. Board of Education :

3/11/2013 Group 3 3 Development of Brown v. Board of Education Gerald Portz

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 4 Brown v. BOE What is Brown V. Board of Education? The Supreme Court case that dismantled separate but equal education. Reversed Plessey v. Ferguson (1896). (Separate but Equal) Why – Up until this time the practice of segregation in public schools was legal. (separate was not equal) When did this case take place? May 17 th 1954. Involved were 5 different states with similar segregation problems:

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 5 Brown v. BOE In Virginia: Davis v. County Board of Prince Edward County. Delaware: Belton v. Gephardt South Carolina: Briggs v. Elliott Washington, D.C.: Bolling v. C. Melvin Sharpe; this was argued as a 5 th Amendment violation of “Due Process” Kansas: Brown V. Board of Education

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 6 Brown v. BOE Black Doll Study Inferiority complex of Black children was proven and used in Brown v. Board of education (Dr. Kenneth Clarck, 1939) Kiri Davis (16 year old from New York) Recreation of the Black Doll Study in 2005 tested African American 4 and 5 year olds in predominately White schools as well as African American schools (Harlem, NY)

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 7 Brown v. BOE The Brown v. BOE was a composite of 5 different , but similar, appellate cases that were before the Court began in 1951. These cases were consolidated in 1952 as Brown v. BOE. Attorney Thurgood Marshall wrote that the states had no valid reason to impose segregation, that racial separation: no matter how equal the facilities. Segregation of white and colored students has a detrimental affect upon the colored children.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 8 Brown v. BOE The impact on the colored children is greater when it has the sanction of the law: it affects the motivation for children to learn. It also has a tendency to retard the educational and mental development of black children. Such that, restrictions or distinctions based on “race or color” violated the equal protection clause of the 14 th Amendment.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 9 Brown v. BOE The Fourteenth Amendment states that No State shall make or enforce any law that shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of The United States of America; Nor shall any State deprive a person of live, liberty, or property without due process of the law

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 10 Arguments: the Justices requested briefs from both sides to answer five questions. The main question pertained to whether or not Congress had segregation in mind when it ratified the 14 th Amendment. Brown v. BOE

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 11 Brown v. BOE It was concluded that the Plessey v. Ferguson doctrine of “separate but equal” has no place in public education. Separate facilities are inherently unequal. Students were deprived of equal protection by the 14 th Amendment. All these cases violated Due Process of the 14 th Amendment and the students rights. This paved the way for integration in the schools.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 12 Brown v. BOE A unanimous ruling in favor of Brown was that segregation of schools was unconstitutional and violated the equal protection clause of the 14 th Amendment. Chief Justice Earl Warren supported the Mendez case as an appeal in the state of California which was a precedent for Brown v. Board of Education. He pushed for a unanimous decision on BOE to avoid arguments from the Southern states.

BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 13 BOE The decision was unanimous for the BOE appeal attorneys. The attorneys for BOE were notified to return in one year to plan out the decision for desegregation and how it is to be carried out.

Appellate Process :

3/11/2013 Group 3 14 Appellate Process Barbara Trice

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 15 Brown v. BOE NAACP began recruiting plaintiffs to fight segregation in Topeka, Kansas in elementary schools in 1949 or 1950. Oliver Brown and his daughter Linda, were the names on the litigation case. He wanted his daughter to be able to go to an all-white segregated white school.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 16 Brown v. BOE It took until 1952, before the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari on Oct. 8. The court combined Brown with a South Carolina segregation case, Briggs et al v. Elliott et al. Noted: 3 additional cases were to be added to BOE for a total of 5. Chief Counsel Thurgood Marshall for the NAACP, first argued the case on Dec. 9, 1952.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 17 Brown v. BOE Thurgood was compelled to repeat his argument a year later, on Dec. 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.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 18 Brown v. BOE In this milestone decision, the Supreme Court ruled that separating children in public schools on the basis of race was unconstitutional. It signaled the end of legalized racial segregation in the schools of the United States, overruling the “separate but equal” principal set forth in the 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson case .

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 19 Brown v. BOE Although it acknowledged some of the plaintiffs’ claims, a three-judge panel at the U.S. District Court that heard the cases ruled in favor of the school boards. The plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. When the cases came before the Supreme Court in 1952, the Court consolidated all five cases under the name of Brown v. Board of Education. Marshall personally argued the case before the Court.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 20 Brown v. BOE Although he raised a variety of legal issues on appeal, the most common one was that separate school systems for blacks and whites were inherently unequal, and thus, violate the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, relying on sociological tests, such as the one performed by social scientist Kenneth Clark, and other data, he also argued that segregated school systems had a tendency to make black children feel inferior to white children, and thus, such a system should not be legally permissible.

Brown v BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 21 Brown v BOE In 1979, three young African-American attorneys in Topeka, Kan., petitioned the district court to reopen Brown to determine whether the school board had eliminated all vestiges of discrimination. That case, known as Brown III , resulted in the Topeka Public Schools building three magnet schools.

Brown v. BOE:

3/11/2013 Group 3 22 Brown v. BOE On Tuesday, May 11, 2004, one week before the 50th anniversary of the decision in Brown v. Board of Education , a state district court judge sitting in Topeka issued an order essentially closing the Kansas Public Schools for the coming school year, due to the failure of the Legislature to provide sufficient funds to ensure constitutionally adequate education to poor, disabled and minority children in Kansas. Brown v. Board of Education was one of the authorities cited by the court.

SUPREME COURT DECISION :

3/11/2013 Group 3 23 SUPREME COURT DECISION Rosalie Salazar .

THE UNANIMOUS DECISION DIDN’T COME EASY:

3/11/2013 Group 3 24 THE UNANIMOUS DECISION DIDN’T COME EASY Brown v. The Board of Education was ultimately a unanimous decision void of dissenting opinions. Prior to the decision, each justice held varying positions. This resulted in a stalemate after the first hearing. The court agreed to re-hear the case again at a future date which provided time for consensus building among the Supreme Court Justices

THE POSITIONS OF EACH JUSTICE DURING CONSENSUS BUILDING FOR THE UNANIMOUS DECISION:

3/11/2013 Group 3 25 Justices Hugo Black, William Douglas, Harold Burton, and Sherman Minton were all on board to overturn Plessy on the basis that the Separate but Equal doctrine was unconstitutional. Justice Tom Clark believed the topic should be left to the states since Plessy was a precedent for this already Justices Felix Frankfurter and Robert Jackson disapproved of the segregation, however they were concerned that a decision like this may have been a result of personal or political agendas, often referred to as judicial activism, and were reluctant to make any decision under the premises of judicial activism. THE POSITIONS OF EACH JUSTICE DURING CONSENSUS BUILDING FOR THE UNANIMOUS DECISION

THE POSITIONS OF EACH JUSTICE DURING CONSENSUS BUILDING FOR THE UNANIMOUS DECISION:

3/11/2013 Group 3 26 THE POSITIONS OF EACH JUSTICE DURING CONSENSUS BUILDING FOR THE UNANIMOUS DECISION Justice Stanley F. Reed was the only justice who did not reject segregation, but thought segregation was good for Negroes since they were not completely culturally assimilated to the predominant white culture. He also believed the decision should be left to the states. Justice Vinson , who died before the court reheard the case was an interference to the success of this case because he believed the court hadn’t issued yet any legislation covering desegregation. After he died though, this gave way for Chief Earl Warren to be appointed. Chief Justice Earl Warren supported the integration of Mexican American students in the Mendez case, and also supported desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education. Chief Earl Warren was also the one who spearheaded the necessity to build a unanimous decision to avoid opposition from the South. Chief Earl Warren suggested any dissenting opinions may have been argued in the future, and therefore, a unanimous decision on this topic was necessary. Jackson and Reed were the last on board to adopt the majority opinion among the justices.

ARRIVING TO UNANIMOUS – ALL FACTORS CONSIDERED:

3/11/2013 Group 3 27 ARRIVING TO UNANIMOUS – ALL FACTORS CONSIDERED Analysis of case law and other related precedent The 14 th amendments Equal Protection Clause 14 th Amendment as it relates to the intentions toward public education The developments of public education at the time and its current (1950’s) importance in society Constitutionality of separate but equal in the Plessy Case 8 sociological studies on the effects of segregation on African American children All eventually agreed that the 14th amendment gave the courts authority to desegregate public education

UNANIMOUS (9-0) RULING :

3/11/2013 Group 3 28 UNANIMOUS (9-0) RULING A unanimous ruling in favor of Brown was that segregation of schools was unconstitutional and violated the equal protection clause of the 14 th amendment. Chief Earl Warren made a brief writing for the court and addressed some of the factors previously mentioned that helped describe the courts stance in arriving to the decision. Justice Warren also instructed the NAACP attorneys to return a year later to assist the court in determining how the desegregation should be carried out in the schools.

Decision to Practice on Brown v. Board of Education:

3/11/2013 Group 3 29 Andy XU RUNYUN Decision to Practice on Brown v. Board of Education

Unanimous Opinions:

3/11/2013 Group 3 30 The case was being reargued at the behest of Associate Justice Felix Frankfurter. Chief Justice Vinson had been a key stumbling block. The justices in support of desegregation spent much effort convincing those who initially decided to dissent to join a unanimous opinion. Unanimous Opinions

Consensus Buildings:

3/11/2013 Group 3 31 Earl Warren was appointed Chief Justice in 1953 after Vinson’s death. Warren convened a meeting of the justices, and presented to them the simple argument that the only reason to sustain segregation was an honest belief in the inferiority of African Americans. Although most justices were immediately convinced, Warren spent some time after this famous speech convincing everyone to sign onto this opinion. Consensus Buildings

Key Holdings:

3/11/2013 Group 3 32 Even if segregated black and white schools were of equal quality in facilities and teachers, segregation by itself was harmful to black students and unconstitutional!!! Reporters have discovered that a significant psychological and social disadvantage was given to black children from the nature of segregation itself! Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. Key Holdings

Public Insights:

3/11/2013 Group 3 33 A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn! In the field of public education, the doctrine of “Separate but equal" has no place! Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal! Segregation with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to retard the educational and mental development of African American children and may also deprive them of certain rights and benefits! Public Insights

Local Practices:

3/11/2013 Group 3 34 The Board of Education of Topeka began to end segregation in the Topeka Elementary schools in August 1953, integrating two attendance districts. Not everyone accepted the Brown v. Board of Education decision initially. Discriminations still exist at the beginning couple of years. The Mankind Quarterly was founded in 1960, in part in response to the Brown decision. School desegregation has been argued to have contributed to White Flight. Some aspects of the Brown decision are still being debated nowadays. Local Practices

REFERENCES:

3/11/2013 Group 3 35 Brown v. Board of Education (2006). Retrieved from URL: http://www.enotes.com/brown-v-board-education-reference/brown-v-board-education. Source: Supreme Court Drama , ©2006 Gale Cengage. All Rights Reserved Brown v. Board of Education (2013). Wikipedia Online Encyclopedia. Retrieved from URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education. Gill, Paz, Plutko, Wagner (2006). Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954 ). Selected Court Case Decisions Coursepack. REFERENCES

authorStream Live Help