Brown Vs Board Of Education. 1954 Final decision?
1-The final decisionn of Brown v. Board of Education was that Schools shall no longer remain segragated because it was a violation of the 14th Amendment. 2-No, Blacks did not get equal rights as the whites. Everything else in society remained segragated EX: water fountains, bathrooms, restraunts, etc.... 3-NO, After the decision at Brown v. The Board of Education tensions between whites and blacks rose. there was more lynching and hate crimes going around than before. Many school closed down because they refused to let blacks "plague" their education systems and teachers all over began quitting. 4-I dont get your 4th question if you re-word it i may be able to answer it.
Was the Brown vs Board of Education decision recently overturned?
No. A few months ago the Court ruled in a couple of related cases concerning forced "busing" of students in Seattle, Wa and Louisville, KY. In both cities, students are in general assigned to their closest school. However, every neighborhood has a different racial make-up, so that resulted in each school having different percentages of blacks and whites. So both school districts started programs of reasigning students to more distant schools, based solely on their race, so as to get the same racial mixture in every school. The Supreme court ruled this was illegal. It is legal, they ruled, for schools to use race as a factor in determining placement, but NOT for them to base decisions SOLELY on race. Some liberal pundits said that this "overturned" Brown as it would lead to white neighborhoods having white schools, and vice-versa. However, it really upheld Brown, working on the basis , as the court said, that "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." Richard
With the edit made in the original question, my answer is no longer responsive. I think Jevan Lemoine has a much better answer now.----The question asks us to assume that parents have complete control of public schools. This is not the case in most schools. The assumption is not helpful in imagining the state of black education in a world without Brown v. Board because “separate but equal” still requires us to take away local control from black parents.The fact is that most parents, black and white, lack significant control over their children's school. Enforcing "separate but equal" in public schools would require that any mandatory curricula or testing requirements imposed by local, state, and federal agencies would have be equally applied to all schools: black and white. Black education would still have to abide by the Federal No Child Left Behind; black students would still have to learn the same "content standards" as their white counter parts. Having a separate black school district with separate administrative hierarchy and standards would not be "equal." Segregation alone would not automatically lead to more local parent control. Regardless, of the issue of local control, a segregated school system would still be bad for black children. It's hard to ignore the argument that separate schools would be inherently bad for children. The Court held that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal" and that segregation has a "detrimental effect upon the colored children." The argument was made that even if equal, by requiring segregation, black children would learn that they are inferior and that this belief would cause negative psychological effects that would harm their educational future. For example, black kids would not bother going to college because they "know" they are inferior. I think that the question proposed in the comment is far better - "Would any school that is controlled by the parents of the children going to that school have fewer problems than a school where they have no control or their control is diminished?"This question is independent of race and I will admit that I am not sure of the answer.
I think that it was correctly decided as to the conclusion, but it as a very poorly written opinion. The reliance on sociology and the social impacts on minorities had no genuine basis in law when dealing with a solid precedent of over fifty years endurance ("separate but equal" conceived in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896). I would have been much happier if the Court would have reversed the Civil Rights Cases decision and Plessy on the basis that the original decisions regarding the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment which gave no teeth whatsoever to the protection of the rights of Blacks had been wrongly decided. It would have then been a natural progression to see how an unequal education does not meet the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment. So I feel it was poorly reasoned, but the correct conclusion was pronounced.
Is Brown or the Board of Education the defendant?
Correct, IF this is a criminal case. But a criminal case will usually be "The State of..." or "The People of..." v [name of defendant] - the state is prosecuting the defendant for breaking the law the state made. So this looks like a civil case to me, and others have said that it is. In which case your words are totally wrong, there is no crime, Brown is the plaintiff (because he is bringing the complaint) and the Board of Education is the defendant.
Brown v. Board of Education?
The staggering courtroom's Brown v. Board of practise determination did no longer abolish segregation in different public areas, such as eating places and restrooms, nor did it require desegregation of public colleges via a particular time. It did, besides the incontrovertible fact that, declare the permissive or mandatory segregation that existed in 21 states unconstitutional. It grew to become right into a great step in the direction of finished desegregation of public colleges. Even partial desegregation of those colleges, besides the incontrovertible fact that, grew to become into nevertheless very a techniques away, as might quickly become obvious The landmark staggering courtroom case of Brown v. Board of practise (1954) settled the query of despite if or no longer blacks and whites can get carry of an practise integrated with or become self reliant from one yet another. The case overturned the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson, which everyday the doctrine of "separate yet equivalent." this concept suggested that separate public centers of equivalent high quality do no longer violate the equivalent protection clause of the Fourteenth substitute of the form.
Brown v. Board of Education?
I think the answer to this question will all depend on the person your asking... there isn't any right or wrong answer. Judicial Activisim refers to a decision, made by a judge, that does not reflect a clear interpretation of the Constitution. His decision is influenced entirely by "activisim" and trying to further his own personal social beliefs/views. Judicial Restraint refers to a decision made by a judge that relies on a more strict intepretation of the Constituion. That is, the judge's opinion is based on what he felt that the Framers of the Constitution intended. In my opinion, Brown V. Board of Education can be interpreted as being either activisim or restraint. The question is, did the Framers of the Constitution intend to have blacks and white attending the same schools? Did they view whites and colors as being equal? As much as I oppose racism and support the decision in Brown, I feel the justices' decision in Brown was a clear case of judicial activism. Judges were trying to create social change as opposed to interpreting the Constitution. After the decision, states were expected to implement the new policies forthwith. As can be imagined, schools in the South attempted to drag their feet in implementing the change. National Guard forces were used at some schools to protect blacks.
Quick and dirty answer: Brown v. Board was the Supreme Court case that ended racial segregation in American public education, and it is the reversal of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). Plessy is where the phrase "separate but equal" comes from. Brown, in a 9-0 opinion, held that de jure racial segregation was ruled to be in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, since "separate but equal" was seen by the Court to be inherently unequal. The case is interesting on several levels. It is an example of the Court reversing itself, albeit ~60 years later, and it would not have ended the way it did if not for Justice Frankfurter. Felix Frankfurter pleaded for the Court to rehear the case in the term after it was originally argued. He did this in order to stall for time and build a consensus among the Justices. Some of the Justices thought at the time that ending segregation without legislation passed by Congress was tantamount to judicial activism, despite their own beliefs that segregation was wrong.(Imagine that...a time in America where judges were afraid to legislate from the bench.)
Well, for school segregation, a number of northern states had banned the practice. The South, on the other hand , required it.Keep in mind that even after Brown v. Board , schools were unintentionally segregated (see Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Ed)