Brown vs. Board of Education: Key Points and Behind the Scenes

Brown vs. Board of Education: Key Points and Behind-the-Scenes

Justice Hugh, appointed by Truman, was initially hesitant.
Justice Vincent, a Republican also appointed by Truman, faced the backdrop of the Korean War.
Initial arguments occurred over multiple days in a conference room setting.
Stanley Reed initially favored upholding the separate but equal doctrine.
Tom Clark from Texas worried about the potential social upheaval and violence in the South if segregation was overturned. He feared riots and other negative consequences.
Clark's concern stemmed from the Supreme Court's role in establishing the legal basis for segregation through Plessy vs. Ferguson, leading to the Jim Crow era.
The concern was that overturning Plessy could lead to white people harming black people, and the justices felt some responsibility since the court had enabled segregation.
The question was raised: What makes overturning Plessy different now?

Felix Frankfurter proposed re-examining the original intent of the drafters of the Fourteenth Amendment regarding segregation in schools.
The question was whether the drafters had any specific views on segregation violating the equal protection clause.
Frankfurter suggested that they allow the lawyers to brief this issue and postpone the decision until the next term.

The justices agreed to postpone the decision and task the lawyers with researching the drafters' intent regarding segregation in public schools and the Fourteenth Amendment.
This delay was a tactic to find a strong constitutional reason to potentially side with those hesitant to overturn Plessy and aim for a 6-3 decision.
The delay provided a full term to deliberate and seek a compelling constitutional basis for their decision.

The focus shifted to examining what was said during the drafting and ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Researchers looked for legislative history, including congressional debates, senators' statements, and any documents submitted during the amendment's drafting process.
This is similar to how the Federalist Papers are used to understand the intentions of the drafters of the Constitution.
The Federalist Papers were written by supporters of the Constitution to explain and defend the new framework of government.

The Supreme Court justices often look to dictionaries from the time a statute was written to understand the meaning of specific words but that can be disingenuous.
Dictionaries are not always used objectively, as justices may select definitions that support their pre-existing opinions.
Despite these challenges, examining the drafters' intentions remains a long-standing tradition in legal interpretation.

Thurgood Marshal and his team, including historians, conducted extensive legal research.
They faced the challenge that schools in Washington D.C., under congressional control, were segregated at the time of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was detrimental to their case.
Research involved examining old newspapers and historical documents, now often available online.

Dwight Eisenhower's popularity led to a political deal with Earl Warren. Warren dropped out of a race in exchange for a promise.
After Chief Justice Fred Vincent's death, Frankfurter remarked, "This is the first indication I have had that there is a God."
Despite the deal, there was initial reluctance from the White House to appoint Warren as Chief Justice.
Warren's representatives had to remind Eisenhower of their agreement, emphasizing the importance of keeping his word.
Warren was appointed Chief Justice, bringing his political acumen to the Supreme Court.

Earl Warren was known for his ability to connect with people and build consensus, even among political opponents.
Warren's appointment shifted the dynamics within the Supreme Court, particularly in handling the Brown v. Board of Education case.
As Chief Justice, Warren had the influential power to assign who speaks first during case discussions, shaping the narrative and direction of deliberations.

Warren started by stating, "I don't see how we can allow separate but equal to remain", thus revealing his position.
Initially, the vote was expected to be 5-4 against overturning Plessy v. Ferguson. However, Warren sought to sway the hesitant justices.
Warren strategically engaged with Justices Tom Clark and Jackson, while excluding Frankfurter due to his polarizing nature.
These discussions aimed to highlight the historical significance of the decision, questioning whether they wanted to be on the wrong side of history.

Justice Jackson worried about potential political revolt in the South and the lack of enforcement power if the executive branch didn't support the court's order.
To address concerns about immediate and potentially disruptive integration, the court decided to postpone deciding on the remedy.
This compromise helped to secure Tom Clark's vote by not mandating immediate integration and focusing solely on the unconstitutionality of separate but equal.
The goal was to achieve a unanimous or near-unanimous decision to give the ruling more weight and legitimacy.

Earl Warren took Stanley Reed aside and persuaded him to abandon his dissenting position for the sake of the court and the country.
Reed was convinced to avoid writing a dissent that could encourage resistance to the decision - Reed ultimately agreed.
When the decision was announced, Marshall was surprised and moved by the unanimous verdict.

For a long time, the Supreme Court maintained a tradition of unanimity in cases involving equal protection and state discrimination based on race.
The unanimous decision was seen as critical for the symbolism and impact of the ruling.

Plaintiffs argued that segregation violated constitutional rights by impeding students' education, creating inequality, and promoting discrimination.
They emphasized that separate but equal could never be truly equal because African American students were denied equal opportunities, perpetuating a system that deemed them as inferior.
The Supreme Court can't ignore trial courts that found those facts to exist.

The Supreme Court considered how society and the educational system had changed since the drafting of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Recognizing that education is a vital function of state governments, the court acknowledged that societal progress should influence the interpretation of constitutional principles.
The court emphasized that they must look at the effect of segregation itself solely on the basis of race

The ruling specifically applied to public schools due to the Fourteenth Amendment's focus on state actions.
The Fourteenth Amendment operates against the states only, so that is why it only related to public schools.
Other forms of discrimination in businesses are regulated under the commerce clause, which grants the federal government authority to regulate interstate commerce.