Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955
File 028
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955 - File 028. 1955-09. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. May 28, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/489/show/447.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1955-09). Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955 - File 028. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/489/show/447

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955 - File 028, 1955-09, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed May 28, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/489/show/447.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 8, September 1955
Alternate Title Facts Forum News, Vol. IV, No. 8, September 1955
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date September 1955
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 4 1955; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States: This item is in the public domain in the United States and may be used freely in the United States. The item may not be in the public domain under the copyright laws of other countries.
Item Description
Title File 028
Transcript §5 born en naturalized in the I nited States. Their opponents, just as certainlv. were antagonistic to both the letter and the spirit of the amendments and wished them to have the most limited effect. \\ heel nthers in Cnngress and the state legislatures had in mind cannot he determined with any degree of certainty. \n additional reason fnr the inconclusive nature of the Amendment's history, with respect to segregated schools, is the status uf puhlie education eit that lime.' In the Smith, the movement toward free common schools, supported by general taxation, had nut yet taken hold. Education nf white children was largely in the hands uf private groups. Education ..f Negroes was almost nonexistent, and practically all nf the race were illiterate. In facl. anv education ol Negroes was forbidden by law in some states. Today, in contrast, many Negroes have' achieved outstanding success in the arts ami sciences as well as in the business and professional world, li i- true that public education heul already advanced further in the North, hut the effect of the Amendment on Northern Male- was generally ignored in the congressional debates. Even in the North, the conditions of public education did not approximate those existing today. The curriculum was usually rudimentary : ungraded -. Ikh.I- were common in rural areas: the school term vvas hut three months a year in many states; and compulsory school attendance weis virtual]) unknown. As a consequence, it is not surprising that there should be so little in the history of the Fourteenth Amendment relating to its intended effect on public education. In the first cases in this Court construing tlie Fourteenth Amendment, decided short!) after its adoption, the Court interpreted il as proscribing all state-imposed discriminations against the Negro race.5 The doctrine of '"separate but equal" did not make its appearance in this Courl until 1896 in the case of Pless) v. Ferguson, supra, involving not education but transportation.' Vmerican courts have since labored with the doctrine for over half a century. In this Courl. there hav.- been six cases involving lhe "separate bul equal" doctrine in the field of puhlie' education.' In dimming v. ( oui tv Board "1 Education, 1 75 [ . S. 528, and Gong Lum v. Rice, 27") 1 . S. 78. the validity of the doctrine itself was nol challenged.3 In more recent cases, all on the graduate school level, inequalit) was found in that specific benefits enjoyed b) white students were denied to Negro students of the same educational qualifications. Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Can- ada, 305 I . S. 337; Sipuel v. Oklahoma, 332 I . S. 631 : Sweat! v. Painter. 339 I . S. 629; \l. l.aurin v. Oklah a State lifgeuts. 339 I . S. 637. In none of these cases wa- il necessary to reexamine tin- doctrine lu grant relief to the Negro plaintiff. And in Sweat! v. Painter, supra. the (aunt expressl) reserved decision on the question whether I'lessv v. Ferguson should be held inapplicable to public education. In the instant cases, thai question is directly presented. Here, unlike Sweatl v. Painler. 11 it - r< - arc findings below that the Negro and while schools inv.lv.-.1 have been equalized, or are being equalized, with respect to buildings, curricula. qualifications and salaries of teachers, and other "tangible' factors." Our deci- -ieen. therefore, cannol lurn een merely a comparison of these tangible factors in Ihe Negro and while schools involved in each ul the cases. \\ (> must look instead to the effect ')f segregation itself on public education. In approaching ibis problem, we can mil turn the clock back to 1868 when the Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896 when Pless) v. Ferguson weis written. We musl consider public education in the light uf ils full development and ii- presenl place in American life throughout the nation. Only in this way can it he determined if segregation in public schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws. Today, education is perhaps the most important function of st;it,. ;iriel local governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and Ihe greal expenditures for education both demonstrate our recognition ..I the importance of education to our democratic society. It is required in llie performance of our most basic puhlie responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation ol good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it Is doubtful thai any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the oppor- ttinitv ol an education. Such an opportunity, where the state ha- undertaken to provide it. i- a right which musl I"' made available to all on equal terms. We come then to the question presented: Does segregation ol children in public schools -e.l.'lv on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible ' factors mav be equal, deprive the children of the minority group ..I equal cilucalioneil opportunities? \\ e believe thai it does. In Sweat) v. Painter, supra, in finding that a segregated law school for Negroes could nut provide them equal educational opportunities, this Courl relied in large' part on "those qualities which are in capable of objective measurement bul which make for greatness in a law school." In Mel.emi in v. Oklahoma Steele Regents, supra, the Court, in requiring thai a \ igrn admitted to a «hite graduate school be treated like all oilier -tiident-. again resorted to intangible considerations: ". . . his ability to stmlv. to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." Such considerations apply with added force to children in grade and high schools. To separate them frnm others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community thai may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever lu be undone. Tbe effect of this separation on their educational opportunities was well steili'el hv ei finding in the Kansas case by a court which nevertheless fell compelled tu rule against the Negro plaintiffs: "Segregation of while and colored children in public schools ha- ;t detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impacl is greater when il has lhe sanction ol the law : for lhe policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the Negro group. \ sense of inferiority affects the motivation ■■! ei child In learn. Segregation with the sanction of law. therefore, heis a tendency to retard the educational and mental development of Negro children and to deprive them nf sunn' of the benefits they would receive in a racially in- ti'graii'il school system."10 Whatever may have been the extent "I psychological knowledge at the time of Pless) v. Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern authority." .Any language in I'lessv v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is rejected. We conclude lhat in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities arc inherently unequal. There fore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similar!) situated for whom the actions have been brought arc bv reason of tl"' segregation complained of, deprived ol the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This disposition makes unnecessary emv di-- cussion whether such segregation also violates the Due Process Clause "f the Fourteenth Amendment.12 Because these are class actions, because ol the wide applicability of thi* decision, and because of the grceit variety of local conditions, the formulation "I decrees in these eases presents problems ol considerable complexity. On reargu- ineut. the consideration of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question the constitutionalit) ol segregation in public education. W" have now announced thai such segregation i- a denial "I the equal protection of the laws." . . . ll is so ordered. '[EDITOR'S NOTE; The Supreme Court eeplie'lel tlii- decision thai segregation in pubh' Bchools i- mi' i.l.-lilllli.ilieil l.v eiel'llli.inell ..["" ee.ti- rendered in Meev eee..I October, 1954, eil'1"1 furthei arguments Meae- presented <>n ila-' eiml related cases. I S; Page '-'ei FACTS FORUM NEWS, Septembi
File Name uhlib_1352973_v004_n008_028.jpg