supreme court, segregation, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, american constitution, supreme court justice, reconstruction era, civil war, civil rights, NAACP National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
Let's be clear, the decision of the Supreme Court that we are going to study today is a real jurisprudence change, which means that the decision overturns several other Supreme Court decisions, resulting in a total change in the analysis of the constitution over time. It's very important to say this because it shows that it's not the law that shapes society, but rather society that shapes the law in its image. Thus, if society changes, the law will change, and it's a matter of time, sometimes patience, because as an old saying, haunting the halls of the Secretary of Justice goes: "A Supreme Court justice never resigns and rarely dies." Thomas Jefferson, who uttered these words, couldn't have been more right, because a judge seldom changes their mind, and when they're expected to remain in place for several decades, there's a generation gap that becomes more than evident. Inside Invisible Man, we're before this decision which explains this separation between black and white students.
[...] This was reflected in the law: No right to vote nationally. No possibility of interracial marriage. Segregation in public spaces. Lack of ability for black people to bring lawsuits to court. It's quite a limited list of the constitutive elements of segregation in the South, and when the Union restores order, yes, slavery is abolished, but Andrew Johnson, the president succeeding Lincoln, also doesn't want to rush the conservative society of the South, being a native himself, he seeks to appease these states. [...]
[...] 483 (1954) - What exceptional circumstances allow states to establish segregation? Beginning of the situation and political context Let's be clear, the decision of the Supreme Court that we are going to study today is a real jurisprudence change, which means that the decision overturns several other Supreme Court decisions, resulting in a total change in the analysis of the constitution over time. It's very important to say this because it shows that it's not the law that shapes society, but rather society that shapes the law in its image. [...]
[...] This was a major breakthrough and marked the beginning of a closer alignment of law with social considerations, but also with the work provided by the humanities and social sciences. The law thus embraced a profoundly realistic perspective, adopting the principle of in concreto effect according to concrete considerations. Therefore, it's an absolutely major decision. Impacts However, the ruling has an intrinsic gap: it does not present a clear agenda for the end of segregation; it simply declares it illegal. [...]
[...] This is yet another violation of the 14th Amendment because laws, which must be general, cannot apply in the same manner; it is an infringement on the fair application of federal legislation. The defense, in turn, will present three arguments: 1. Adherence to the "separate but equal" doctrine: The defense argued that the doctrine established in the Plessy Vs. Ferguson ruling, which stated that racial segregation was constitutional as long as separate facilities were "equal in quality," should be upheld because the court's jurisprudence on this matter has been consistent, and it was unthinkable to change course. [...]
[...] Ferguson ruling of 1896 which upheld Louisiana state law which allowed for "equal but separate accommodations for the white and colored races.". The Court attempts a balancing act between preserving local customary law and federal legislation, against the backdrop of the specter of the Civil War. Thus, it declares the famous formula: "separate but equal." We are still in a racialized register where rights are the same but do not have the same scope based on an arbitrary criterion: skin color. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
