| Line 4: |
Line 4: |
| | '''SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES''' | | '''SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES''' |
| | | | |
| − | Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (USSC+) | + | Brown v. [[Board of Education]], 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (USSC+) |
| | | | |
| | Argued December 9, 1952 | | Argued December 9, 1952 |
| Line 18: |
Line 18: |
| | Segregation of white and Negro children in the public schools of a State solely on the basis of race, pursuant to state laws permitting or requiring such segregation, denies to Negro children the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment -- even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors of white and Negro schools may be equal. | | Segregation of white and Negro children in the public schools of a State solely on the basis of race, pursuant to state laws permitting or requiring such segregation, denies to Negro children the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment -- even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors of white and Negro schools may be equal. |
| | | | |
| − | (a) The history of the Fourteenth Amendment is inconclusive as to its intended effect on public education. | + | (a) The history of the [[Fourteenth Amendment]] is inconclusive as to its intended effect on public education. |
| | | | |
| | (b) The question presented in these cases must be determined not on the basis of conditions existing when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, but in the light of the full development of public education and its present place in American life throughout the Nation. | | (b) The question presented in these cases must be determined not on the basis of conditions existing when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, but in the light of the full development of public education and its present place in American life throughout the Nation. |
| Line 24: |
Line 24: |
| | (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. | | (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. |
| | | | |
| − | (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. | + | (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. |
| | | | |
| − | (e) The "separate but equal" doctrine adopted in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, has no place in the field of public education. | + | (e) The "[[separate but equal]]" doctrine adopted in [[Plessy v. Ferguson]], 163 U.S. 537, has no place in the field of [[public education in the United States|public education]]. |
| | | | |
| | (f) The cases are restored to the docket for further argument on specified questions relating to the forms of the decrees. | | (f) The cases are restored to the docket for further argument on specified questions relating to the forms of the decrees. |
| Line 33: |
Line 33: |
| | Opinion | | Opinion |
| | | | |
| − | MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court. | + | MR. CHIEF JUSTICE [[Earl Warren|WARREN]] delivered the opinion of the Court. |
| − | These cases come to us from the States of Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware. They are premised on different facts and different local conditions, but a common legal question justifies their consideration together in this consolidated opinion. | + | These cases come to us from the States of [[Kansas]], [[South Carolina]], [[Virginia]], and [[Delaware]]. They are premised on different facts and different local conditions, but a common legal question justifies their consideration together in this consolidated opinion. |
| | | | |
| | 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. In each instance, they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race. This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment. In each of the cases other than the Delaware case, a three-judge federal district court denied relief to the plaintiffs on the so-called "separate but equal" doctrine announced by this Court in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537. Under that doctrine, equality of treatment is accorded when the races are provided substantially equal facilities, even though these facilities be separate. In the Delaware case, the Supreme Court of Delaware adhered to that doctrine, but ordered that the plaintiffs be admitted to the white schools because of their superiority to the Negro schools. | | 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. In each instance, they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race. This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment. In each of the cases other than the Delaware case, a three-judge federal district court denied relief to the plaintiffs on the so-called "separate but equal" doctrine announced by this Court in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537. Under that doctrine, equality of treatment is accorded when the races are provided substantially equal facilities, even though these facilities be separate. In the Delaware case, the Supreme Court of Delaware adhered to that doctrine, but ordered that the plaintiffs be admitted to the white schools because of their superiority to the Negro schools. |
| Line 76: |
Line 76: |
| | [[Category:Education]] | | [[Category:Education]] |
| | [[Category:Law]] | | [[Category:Law]] |
| | + | [[Category:American State Papers]] |
| | + | [[Category:Black History]] |
| | + | [[Category:The South]] |