最高法院布朗案判决的延续精神

C. Willie
{"title":"最高法院布朗案判决的延续精神","authors":"C. Willie","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv17260cf.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Richard Kluger, author of Simple Justice (1975), is correct in stating that Brown deserves \"a high place in the literature of liberty\" (Kluger 1975: X). Historian John Hope Franklin has written that \"Perhaps no public question in the United States in the twentieth century aroused more interest at home and abroad than the debate about the constitutionality of segregated public schools\" (Franklin 1974: 421). Brown, indeed, became both an exhilarating and a troubling experience for citizens of a nation-state whose government is guided by a Constitution. The Declaration of Independence, adopted unanimously July 4, 1776 by the second Continental Congress, declared that \"all...are created equal.\" And the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States ratified in 1789 indicated that this nation was founded \"to create a more perfect union,\" \"to establish justice...[and] to promote the general welfare...\" (Harvard Classics 1938: 150-155). And the Fourteenth Amendment proscribes all state-imposed discrimination against any citizen of the United States. Brown was exhilarating to citizens of this nation who recognized it as a way of achieving these goals mentioned above. Brown was troubling to citizens who classified it as judicial activism that ignored the authority of the legislative and executive branches of government. They pointed out that the Constitution empowered three separate but interdependent units of government to serve as checks and balances on each unit (Harvard Classics 1938: 180-198). Actually, the Brown v. Board of Education decision of the U.S. Supreme Court descended upon this nation as a way of checking the pervasive injustice rendered by public educational institutions on people of color, particularly African Americans. The injustices resulted from laws, regulations and other public policies promulgated or facilitated by actions of legislative and executive branches of government. Thus, Brown was a legitimate limitation on discriminatory activities facilitated by policies of government that violated the Constitution. In 1896, the Supreme Court in its Plessy vs. Ferguson decision permitted public agencies to separate people of different races, if the separate accommodations were equal. In the Brown decision, the Court rejected the Plessy opinion because the segregated public accommodations for black people and white people were unequal. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored people (NAACP) fashioned a litigation strategy beginning in 1938 designed to demonstrate in courts of law that separate educational facilities and policies in local communities for black and white populations were never equal. The Brown decision in 1954 was the outcome of several court cases argued by NAACP lawyers. I, personally, experienced the inequality of secondary schools in Dallas, Texas, the city of my birth where I grew up. Before 1940, all blacks in this big city attended one high school, The Booker T. Washington High School located in North Dallas. From East Dallas, West Dallas, and South Dallas came black students to matriculate in this single high school reserved exclusively for them. Parenthetically, may I say, the black students used public transportation to go to and from Booker T. Washington High School; and the price for this transportation to maintain segregation was assumed by black students and their parents. In effect, we were forced to cooperate in our own oppression. There is a limit to the capacity of any school, including a segregated school for black people, to accommodate one more student. Booker T. Washington High School was so crowded that it had to operate in double sessions, half of the student body attending school in the morning and half attending in the afternoon. Thus, the Dallas Independent School District decided to erect a new high school in South Dallas for black students. Students like me who lived in Oak Cliff in the western sector of Dallas were reassigned to the new school in South Dallas. …","PeriodicalId":88326,"journal":{"name":"The Negro educational review","volume":"56 1","pages":"11-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Continuing Spirit of the Brown Decision of the Supreme Court\",\"authors\":\"C. Willie\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/j.ctv17260cf.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Richard Kluger, author of Simple Justice (1975), is correct in stating that Brown deserves \\\"a high place in the literature of liberty\\\" (Kluger 1975: X). Historian John Hope Franklin has written that \\\"Perhaps no public question in the United States in the twentieth century aroused more interest at home and abroad than the debate about the constitutionality of segregated public schools\\\" (Franklin 1974: 421). Brown, indeed, became both an exhilarating and a troubling experience for citizens of a nation-state whose government is guided by a Constitution. The Declaration of Independence, adopted unanimously July 4, 1776 by the second Continental Congress, declared that \\\"all...are created equal.\\\" And the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States ratified in 1789 indicated that this nation was founded \\\"to create a more perfect union,\\\" \\\"to establish justice...[and] to promote the general welfare...\\\" (Harvard Classics 1938: 150-155). And the Fourteenth Amendment proscribes all state-imposed discrimination against any citizen of the United States. Brown was exhilarating to citizens of this nation who recognized it as a way of achieving these goals mentioned above. Brown was troubling to citizens who classified it as judicial activism that ignored the authority of the legislative and executive branches of government. They pointed out that the Constitution empowered three separate but interdependent units of government to serve as checks and balances on each unit (Harvard Classics 1938: 180-198). Actually, the Brown v. Board of Education decision of the U.S. Supreme Court descended upon this nation as a way of checking the pervasive injustice rendered by public educational institutions on people of color, particularly African Americans. The injustices resulted from laws, regulations and other public policies promulgated or facilitated by actions of legislative and executive branches of government. Thus, Brown was a legitimate limitation on discriminatory activities facilitated by policies of government that violated the Constitution. In 1896, the Supreme Court in its Plessy vs. Ferguson decision permitted public agencies to separate people of different races, if the separate accommodations were equal. In the Brown decision, the Court rejected the Plessy opinion because the segregated public accommodations for black people and white people were unequal. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored people (NAACP) fashioned a litigation strategy beginning in 1938 designed to demonstrate in courts of law that separate educational facilities and policies in local communities for black and white populations were never equal. The Brown decision in 1954 was the outcome of several court cases argued by NAACP lawyers. I, personally, experienced the inequality of secondary schools in Dallas, Texas, the city of my birth where I grew up. Before 1940, all blacks in this big city attended one high school, The Booker T. Washington High School located in North Dallas. From East Dallas, West Dallas, and South Dallas came black students to matriculate in this single high school reserved exclusively for them. Parenthetically, may I say, the black students used public transportation to go to and from Booker T. Washington High School; and the price for this transportation to maintain segregation was assumed by black students and their parents. In effect, we were forced to cooperate in our own oppression. There is a limit to the capacity of any school, including a segregated school for black people, to accommodate one more student. Booker T. Washington High School was so crowded that it had to operate in double sessions, half of the student body attending school in the morning and half attending in the afternoon. Thus, the Dallas Independent School District decided to erect a new high school in South Dallas for black students. Students like me who lived in Oak Cliff in the western sector of Dallas were reassigned to the new school in South Dallas. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":88326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Negro educational review\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"11-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Negro educational review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv17260cf.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Negro educational review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv17260cf.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

《简单的正义》(1975)一书的作者理查德·克鲁格正确地指出,布朗应该“在自由文学中享有崇高的地位”(克鲁格1975:X)。历史学家约翰·霍普·富兰克林曾写道:“在20世纪的美国,也许没有任何一个公共问题比关于隔离公立学校是否符合宪法的辩论更能引起国内外的兴趣”(富兰克林1974:421)。事实上,对于一个政府受宪法指导的民族国家的公民来说,布朗案既令人振奋又令人不安。1776年7月4日,第二届大陆会议一致通过的《独立宣言》宣布“所有……人生而平等。”1789年批准的美国宪法序言指出,这个国家的建立是为了“建立一个更完美的联盟”,“建立正义……(和)促进一般福利……”(哈佛经典1938:150-155)。第十四修正案禁止各州对任何美国公民施加歧视。布朗大学令这个国家的公民兴奋不已,他们认为这是实现上述目标的一种方式。布朗案令公民感到不安,他们将其归类为无视政府立法和行政部门权威的司法激进主义。他们指出,宪法赋予三个独立但相互依存的政府部门权力,以相互制衡(Harvard Classics 1938: 180-198)。实际上,美国最高法院的“布朗诉教育委员会案”的判决降临到这个国家,是为了检查公共教育机构对有色人种,特别是非洲裔美国人普遍存在的不公正现象。这些不公正现象是由政府立法和行政部门颁布或促进的法律、条例和其他公共政策造成的。因此,布朗案是对违反宪法的政府政策促成的歧视性活动的合法限制。1896年,最高法院在普莱西诉弗格森案的判决中允许公共机构将不同种族的人隔离开来,前提是隔离的条件是平等的。在对布朗案的裁决中,最高法院驳回了普莱西案的意见,因为对黑人和白人实行隔离的公共设施是不平等的。全国有色人种协进会(NAACP)从1938年开始制定了一项诉讼策略,旨在在法庭上证明,当地社区针对黑人和白人的隔离教育设施和政策从来不是平等的。1954年对布朗案的裁决是NAACP律师为几起法庭案件辩护的结果。在我的出生地、我长大的城市德克萨斯州达拉斯,我亲身经历了中学教育的不平等。1940年以前,这个大城市的所有黑人都上一所高中,那就是位于达拉斯北部的布克·t·华盛顿高中。来自东达拉斯、西达拉斯和南达拉斯的黑人学生进入了这所专为他们保留的高中。顺便说一句,黑人学生乘坐公共交通工具往返于布克华盛顿高中;维持种族隔离的交通成本是由黑人学生和他们的父母承担的。实际上,我们是被迫在我们自己的压迫中合作的。任何学校的容纳能力都是有限的,包括一所隔离的黑人学校。布克·t·华盛顿高中(Booker T. Washington High School)太拥挤了,不得不分两班上课,一半的学生上午上学,一半的学生下午上学。因此,达拉斯独立学区决定在南达拉斯为黑人学生建立一所新的高中。像我这样住在达拉斯西部奥克克利夫的学生被重新分配到南达拉斯的新学校。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Continuing Spirit of the Brown Decision of the Supreme Court
Richard Kluger, author of Simple Justice (1975), is correct in stating that Brown deserves "a high place in the literature of liberty" (Kluger 1975: X). Historian John Hope Franklin has written that "Perhaps no public question in the United States in the twentieth century aroused more interest at home and abroad than the debate about the constitutionality of segregated public schools" (Franklin 1974: 421). Brown, indeed, became both an exhilarating and a troubling experience for citizens of a nation-state whose government is guided by a Constitution. The Declaration of Independence, adopted unanimously July 4, 1776 by the second Continental Congress, declared that "all...are created equal." And the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States ratified in 1789 indicated that this nation was founded "to create a more perfect union," "to establish justice...[and] to promote the general welfare..." (Harvard Classics 1938: 150-155). And the Fourteenth Amendment proscribes all state-imposed discrimination against any citizen of the United States. Brown was exhilarating to citizens of this nation who recognized it as a way of achieving these goals mentioned above. Brown was troubling to citizens who classified it as judicial activism that ignored the authority of the legislative and executive branches of government. They pointed out that the Constitution empowered three separate but interdependent units of government to serve as checks and balances on each unit (Harvard Classics 1938: 180-198). Actually, the Brown v. Board of Education decision of the U.S. Supreme Court descended upon this nation as a way of checking the pervasive injustice rendered by public educational institutions on people of color, particularly African Americans. The injustices resulted from laws, regulations and other public policies promulgated or facilitated by actions of legislative and executive branches of government. Thus, Brown was a legitimate limitation on discriminatory activities facilitated by policies of government that violated the Constitution. In 1896, the Supreme Court in its Plessy vs. Ferguson decision permitted public agencies to separate people of different races, if the separate accommodations were equal. In the Brown decision, the Court rejected the Plessy opinion because the segregated public accommodations for black people and white people were unequal. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored people (NAACP) fashioned a litigation strategy beginning in 1938 designed to demonstrate in courts of law that separate educational facilities and policies in local communities for black and white populations were never equal. The Brown decision in 1954 was the outcome of several court cases argued by NAACP lawyers. I, personally, experienced the inequality of secondary schools in Dallas, Texas, the city of my birth where I grew up. Before 1940, all blacks in this big city attended one high school, The Booker T. Washington High School located in North Dallas. From East Dallas, West Dallas, and South Dallas came black students to matriculate in this single high school reserved exclusively for them. Parenthetically, may I say, the black students used public transportation to go to and from Booker T. Washington High School; and the price for this transportation to maintain segregation was assumed by black students and their parents. In effect, we were forced to cooperate in our own oppression. There is a limit to the capacity of any school, including a segregated school for black people, to accommodate one more student. Booker T. Washington High School was so crowded that it had to operate in double sessions, half of the student body attending school in the morning and half attending in the afternoon. Thus, the Dallas Independent School District decided to erect a new high school in South Dallas for black students. Students like me who lived in Oak Cliff in the western sector of Dallas were reassigned to the new school in South Dallas. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Bi-Generational Narrative in the Brown v. Board Decision Minority Status, Oppositional Culture, & Schooling Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Differences in School Discipline among U.S. High School Students: 1991-2005. A Class of Their Own: Black Teachers in the Segregated South The Big Disconnect between Segregation and Integration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1