Brown v. Board of Education (Brown II)

Supreme Court of United States
349 U.S. 294 (1955)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

Once a court has declared that state laws requiring or permitting racial discrimination in public education are unconstitutional, the federal district courts are to fashion remedies and oversee the implementation of desegregation with 'all deliberate speed'.

Facts:

This litigation combines several cases originating from Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware.
In each case, Black children were denied admission to public schools attended by white children under state laws requiring or permitting racial segregation.
The Court previously held in Brown v. Board of Education I that such segregation violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The affected communities presented diverse local conditions and varied administrative and logistical problems related to transitioning to a desegregated school system.

Procedural Posture:

Plaintiffs in Kansas, South Carolina, and Virginia filed suits in United States District Courts seeking to enjoin the enforcement of state constitutional and statutory provisions requiring or permitting racial segregation in public schools.
In each of these cases, a three-judge federal district court denied relief, citing the 'separate but equal' doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson.
In the Delaware case, the Delaware Supreme Court ordered that Black students be immediately admitted to schools previously for white students only, on the grounds that the separate schools were not equal.
The plaintiffs in the Kansas, South Carolina, and Virginia cases appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the school board in the Delaware case also appealed.
The U.S. Supreme Court consolidated the cases and, in its May 17, 1954 opinion (Brown I), held that racial segregation in public education is unconstitutional.
The Court then restored the cases to its docket for reargument on the question of the appropriate remedy.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

What is the appropriate remedy to implement the Court's prior holding that racial segregation in public education is unconstitutional?

Opinions:

Majority - Mr. Chief Justice Warren

The cases should be remanded to the local federal district courts, which are to fashion decrees and oversee the transition to a non-discriminatory school system with 'all deliberate speed.' The Court reasoned that because of their proximity to local conditions, the lower courts that originally heard the cases are best equipped to handle the judicial appraisal of desegregation plans. These courts are to be guided by principles of equity, which allow for practical flexibility in shaping remedies and balancing private interests with public needs. While school authorities have the primary responsibility for solving the practical problems of desegregation, the courts must ensure they make a 'prompt and reasonable start' toward full compliance. The burden is on the school authorities to justify any request for additional time, and such a delay must be in the public interest and consistent with good faith compliance.

Analysis:

This decision, commonly known as Brown II, established the famous 'all deliberate speed' standard for desegregation. While intended to provide a flexible, equitable framework for a massive societal change, the vagueness of the standard was widely exploited by states opposed to integration to delay implementation for many years. The ruling effectively shifted the immense burden of overseeing and enforcing desegregation from the Supreme Court to individual federal district court judges, making them the primary battleground for civil rights litigation for decades. This case highlights the significant practical challenges of enforcing a landmark constitutional ruling in the face of widespread public and political resistance.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Brown v. Board of Education (Brown II) (1955)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"