0000062265 00000 n Messrs. Amos T. Hall, Tulsa, Okl., Robert L. Carter, Washington, D.C., for appellant. The Supreme Court reasoned that, under the Fourteenth Amendments equal protection clause, state officials had the legal duty to treat the plaintiff in the same manner as students of other races. Held: the conditions under which appellant is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws, and the Fourteenth Amendment precludes such differences in treatment by the State based upon race. 1149), the Court, in requiring that a Negro admitted to a white graduate school be treated like all other students, again resorted to intangible considerations: his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession. In this case, we are faced with the question whether a state may, after admitting a student to graduate instruction in its state university, afford him different treatment from other students solely because of his race. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. The Justices acknowledged in their ruling that it is impossible to have a "separate yet equal" education because of the nature of education itself. Possessing a Master's Degree, he applied for admission to the University of Oklahoma in order to pursue studies and courses leading to a Doctorate in Education. The case concerned a Black student who was treated differently than white students after being admitted to the graduate school at the University of Oklahoma. The judgment is, holding that a state-sponsored graduate school's disparate treatment of an African-American student based on race violated the Equal Protection Clause. 0000071278 00000 n 848. Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. Casetext, Inc. and Casetext are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice. Segregated basis is defined as "classroom instruction given in separate classrooms, or at separate times." The court summarily dismissed this argument, noting that the treatment set the plaintiff apart from other students, because he was still restricted as to where he could sit. This appeal followed. 526, that the State had a constitutional duty to provide him with the education he sought as soon as it provided that education for applicants of any other group. (c) Having been admitted to a state-supported graduate school, appellant must receive the same treatment at the hands of the State as students of other races. 1149 (1950), the African-American plaintiff was a graduate student who claimed he had been denied equal educational opportunities because he was required to sit in special seats or at a special table designated for African-Americans. Click here to contact us for media inquiries, and please donate here to support our continued expansion. Even though the university could no longer deny McLaurin a place in school, it tried to segregate him on campus. On January 28, 1948, a retired black professor, George McLaurin, applied to the University of Oklahoma to pursue a Doctorate in Education. WebIn 1948, George McLaurin applied to the University of Oklahoma's master's degree program in education. Contractors of America v. Jacksonville, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. (1950) 455, 456, 457. It further held that to the extent the Oklahoma statutes denied him admission they were unconstitutional and void. The case began when the University of Oklahoma denied George W. McLaurin admission to its graduate program in education, citing the segregation statute, which made it a misdemeanor to operate a school in which both blacks and whites were taught. This case together with Sweatt v. Painter, which was decided the same day, marked the end of the separate but equal doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson in graduate and professional education. 0000002024 00000 n 87 F. Supp. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. We hold that under these circumstances the Fourteenth Amendment precludes differences in treatment by the state based upon race. The proceedings below are stated in the opinion. WebMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. Possessing a Master's degree, he applied for admission to the University of Oklahoma in order to pursue studies and courses leading to a Doctorate in Education. Klarman elaborates on the social, political, and economic factors that shaped the judicial rulings on this case, as well as the many ways in which the final WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents 2,513 views Jul 7, 2016 29 Dislike Share Save OU IACH 2.33K subscribers In this lecture, professor Kathryn Schumaker reviews the In addition, the court ruled that, insofar as the restrictions that officials imposed on the student impaired and inhibited his ability to study and to engage in discussions and debates with other students as well as faculty, this treatment had a detrimental impact on his overall educational experience. At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. Footnotes On the assumption, however, that the State would follow the constitutional mandate, the court refused to grant the injunction, retaining jurisdiction of the cause with full power to issue any necessary and proper orders to secure McLaurin the equal protection of the laws. An Oklahoma law permitted Black 0000002961 00000 n McLaurin appealed to the United States Supreme Court on the basis that he was being denied equal protection under the 14th Amendment. 526 (1948) McLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login). In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1949), 339 U.S. 637 [70 S.Ct. However, the facilities and services used by African Americans were not equal to those of white Americans. See Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629, 70 S.Ct. But at the very least, the state will not be depriving appellant of the opportunity to secure acceptance by his fellow students on his own merits. To read more about the impact of McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents click here. [3], McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents established that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibited states from treating students differently on the basis of race. Citing our decisions in State of Missouri ex rel. 851 [ 94 L.Ed. rG' It was not until 1950 that the Supreme Court ruled that the treatment must be equal between White and African American students. Appellant, a Negro citizen of Oklahoma possessing a masters degree, was admitted to the Graduate School of the state-supported University of Oklahoma as a candidate for a doctorate in education and was permitted to use the same classroom, library and cafeteria as white students. The court denied McLaurin's petition. That court held that such treatment did not violate the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment and denied the motion. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950) McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. We conclude that the conditions under which this appellant is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws. The removal of the state restrictions will not necessarily abate individual and group predilections, prejudices and choices. [2], Oral argument was held between April 3, 1950, and April 4, 1950. Use this button to switch between dark and light mode. McLaurin uses the same classroom, library and cafeteria as students of other races; there is no indication that the seats to which he is assigned in these rooms have any disadvantage of location. 526 (W.D. (1941) 455, 456, 457, that the instruction of black students in institutions of higher education be "upon a segregated basis," however, he was assigned to a seat in the classroom in a row specified for black students, was assigned to a special table in the library, and, although permitted to eat in the cafeteria at the same time as other students, was assigned to a special table there. 0000062061 00000 n Different treatment of students in public institutions of higher learning solely on the basis of race violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. It further held that to the extent the Oklahoma statutes denied him admission they were unconstitutional and void. 851, 94 L.Ed. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) had made segregation a standard practice in much of the American South. 0000000836 00000 n At the time, Oklahoma law prohibited schools from instructing blacks and whites together. The judgment is reversed. Okla. 1948) October 6, 1948 87 F. Supp. Plessy v. Ferguson was a case decided by the Supreme Court in 1896 that said segregation was constitutional as long as the separate facilities provided were of equal standard. Pp. Dictionary of American Family Names Patrick Hanks 2003, 2006. Their own education and development will necessarily suffer to the extent that his training is unequal to that of his classmates. She is certified in English and Special Education. Accordingly, the high court reversed the decision of the U.S. District Court, requiring the University of Oklahoma to remove the restrictions under which McLaurin was attending the institution. In an opinion marked by balance, even caution, a three-judge panel struck down the law, to the extent that it prohibited McLaurin from attending the University of Oklahoma. Pursuant to a requirement of state law that the instruction of Negroes in institutions of higher education be upon a segregated basis, however, he was assigned to a seat in the classroom in a row specified for Negro students, was assigned to a special table in the library, and, although permitted to eat in the cafeteria at the same time as other students, was assigned to a special table there. (1941) 455, 456, 457, which made it a misdemeanor to maintain or operate, teach or attend a school at which both whites and Negroes are enrolled or taught. Briefs of amici curiae, supporting appellant, were filed by Solicitor General Perlman and Philip Elman for the United States; Paul G. Annes for the American Federation of Teachers; Phineas Indritz for the American Veterans Committee, Inc.; Arthur J. Goldberg for the Congress of Industrial Organizations; Edward J. Ennis and Saburo Kido for the Japanese American Citizens League; and Arthur Garfield Hays and Eugene Nickerson for the American Civil Liberties Union. 20 0 obj <> endobj xref 20 27 0000000016 00000 n To remove these conditions, appellant filed a motion to modify the order and judgment of the District Court. 34. In response, legislators in Oklahoma amended the statute, permitting African Americans to be admitted to educational institutions provided that the instruction the institutions provided was upon a segregated basis. The student was then admitted to the graduate school of the University of Oklahoma, a state-funded institution. U.S. Supreme CourtMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950), McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. WebPainter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents [both 1950]). The judgment below is reversed, p. 339 U. S. 642. The decision in this case was made in conjunction with Sweatt v. Painter and later influenced the decision in Brown v. Board of Education.[1]. The proceedings below are stated in the opinion. Appellants case represents, perhaps, the epitome of that need, for he is attempting to obtain an advanced degree in education, to become, by definition, a leader and trainer of others. Research: Josh Altic Vojsava Ramaj At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. 339 U. S. 638-642. In its defense, the state of Oklahoma argued that the restrictions that officials had imposed on African American students were nominal, because the facilities had been made available to all students and the rooms assigned to the plaintiff had no disadvantages when compared with those used by other students. The justices agreed unanimously that since McLaurin was admitted into the University of Oklahoma, denying him access to his peers through segregation was denying him an opportunity to "study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." This precedent would be echoed in the 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled that it was unconstitutional to segregate public schools. The amendment adds the following proviso to each of the sections relating to mixed schools: "Provided, that the provisions of this Section shall not apply to programs of instruction leading to a particular degree given at State owned or operated colleges or institutions of higher education of this State established for and/or used by the white race, where such programs of instruction leading to a particular degree are not given at colleges or institutions of higher education of this State established for and/or used by the colored race; provided further, that said programs of instruction leading to a particular degree shall be given at such colleges or institutions of higher education upon a segregated basis." Peer interaction is a vital element in obtaining a good education, and McLaurin was being deprived of that right through segregation. 320 lessons. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra [ 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. In apparent conformity with the amendment, his admission was made subject to "such rules and regulations as to segregation as the President of the University shall consider to afford to Mr. G. W. McLaurin substantially equal educational opportunities as are afforded to other persons seeking the same education in the Graduate College," a condition which does not appear to have been withdrawn. Held: The conditions under which appellant is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws; and the Fourteenth Amendment precludes such differences in treatment by the State based upon race. Oklahoma Historical Society800 Nazih Zuhdi Drive, Oklahoma City, OK 73105 | 405-521-2491Site Index | Contact Us | Privacy | Press Room | Website Inquiries, Get Updates in Your Inbox Keep up to date with our weekly newsletter delivered straight to your inbox. Ballotpedia features 408,463 encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to segregate McLaurin from his peers. Such restrictions impair and inhibit his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession. The Fourteenth Amendment provides equal protection for citizens under the law. ODDEsDLf%aZ:!}]z'zb;B.MVe'}p`ZXH],VKy(x4~WPr$/~!8snJs^tdL5@0q.EtL vHe]}q|M-8-(%Ys1rC"sm,v9gs:th~ }rr^b+ENtNPt!\>\* \j s (zPxGJULk[ `C%^Tr McLaurin argued that due to this treatment, he was being deprived of his rights under the 14 Amendment. His opinion for the court in 1947 upheld the power of the federal courts to enjoin a strike in coal mines then under control of the federal government. Get free summaries of new US Supreme Court opinions delivered to your inbox! Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337 (1938), and Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 332 U.S. 631 (1948), a statutory three-judge District Court held that the State had a Constitutional duty to provide him with the education he sought as soon as it provided that education for applicants of any other group. - Biography, Facts, Quotes & Accomplishments, Working Scholars Bringing Tuition-Free College to the Community. In 2001, the Bizzell Memorial Library, the main library at the University of Oklahoma, was designated a U.S. National Historic Landmark in commemoration of this case. [339 U.S. 637, 643]. WebCanada, 305 U.S. 337 ; Sipuel v. Oklahoma, 332 U.S. 631 ; Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 ; McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 . MR. CHIEF JUSTICE VINSON delivered the opinion of the Court. (2012.201.B0391.0687, Oklahoma Publishing Company Photography Collection, OHS). However, the court did not issue any injunctive relief as requested by the plaintiff but rather relied "on the assumption that the law having been declared, the State will comply.". In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, (339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. 640-641. Gaines v. Canada, 1938, 305 U.S. 337, 59 S.Ct. Learn about the court case of McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents with a summary and case brief. The amendment adds the following proviso to each of the sections relating to mixed schools: 'Provided, that the provisions of this Section shall not apply to programs of instruction leading to a particular degree given at State owned or operated colleges or institutions of higher education of this State established for and/or used by the white race, where such programs of instruction leading to a particular degree are not given at colleges or institutions of higher education of this State established for and/or used by the colored race; provided further, that said programs of instruction leading to a particular degree shall be given at such colleges or institutions of higher education upon a segregated basis.' WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education , legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously (90), on June 5, 1950, that racial segregation within the facilities and institutions of colleges and universities is inconsistent Further, the Court ruled that "discrimination had no place in education." McLaurin decided to file a suit under the assertion that the conditions under which he was required to receive his education deprived him of his personal right to the equal protection of the laws; and the Fourteenth Amendment eliminates racially biased treatment by the State (638-642). Where conditions exist where a student of color is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws such circumstances theFourteenth Amendmentprecludes differences in treatment by the state based upon race. He wanted to have an education that was similar to his peers. (a) The restrictions imposed upon appellant impair and inhibit his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession. 526 (W. D. Okla. 1949). This includes individual articles (copyright to OHS by author assignment) and corporately (as a complete body of work), including web design, graphics, searching functions, and listing/browsing methods. Possessing a Masters Degree, he applied for admission to the University of Oklahoma in order to pursue studies and courses leading to a Doctorate in Education. 0000004461 00000 n Policy: Christopher Nelson Caitlin Styrsky Molly Byrne Jimmy McAllister Samuel Postell Oklahoma State Regents . 526. Omissions? That court held that such treatment did not violate the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment and denied the motion. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education et al. Brianna has her undergraduate degree in English Education and her master's degree in Urban Education. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950). George W. McLaurin(2012.201.B0391.0687, Oklahoma Publishing Company Photography Collection, OHS). 526 (W.D. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents [ 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google.
Punji Trap Victim,
Fernando Valenzuela Hall Of Fame Voting,
Articles M
