1. Brown vs. Board of Education
Lauren Thomas & Emily Beels
Pd- 1

2. What is the constitutional issue involved in the case?
The issue presented in the Brown vs. Board of Education case was unconstitutional because the racial segregation that violated the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause by having unequal education in black and white schools.

3. Who were the parties involved in the case?
Oliver Brown (parent of child)
State of Kansas
Public schools in Topeko, Kansas

4. When and where did the case take place?
This case began in Topeko, Kansas on May 17, 1954.

5. What events lead up to the case going before the Supreme Court?
There had been 11 different cases between that were similar to the Brown vs. Board of education case. African American students were given out-of-date textbooks and no basic school supplies. African American communities stepped up and decided to make a change in the education system.

6. Historical Context: What was happening in the world that this case needed to be tried?
During the 1900s there was always racial segregation. For example, there were black and white bathrooms, black and white restaurants, and blacks had to sit in the back of busses.

7. What was the Supreme Court’s ruling/ decision?
On May 17th, 1954, Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the court. The Supreme Court ruled that “separate but equal” facilities are unequal and violate the protections of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The rulings prompted the Court to publish guidelines requiring federal district courts to supervise school desegregation.

8. What was the reasoning given by the Supreme Court for making their decision?
The Court held that the segregation of public education based on race instilled a sense of inferiority that had an immense effect on the education and personal growth of African American children.

9. Opposing viewpoints
Although the case was decided unanimously, there was resistance to the Supreme Court’s rulings. There were constitutional scholars who felt that the decision went against legal tradition with data not relying on established law. Supporters of judicial restraint believed that the Court overstepped their constitutional powers by writing new law.

10. How do you feel about the ruling? Why?
This case was acknowledged as one of the greatest Supreme Court decisions of the 20th century, although the Court's decision did not succeed in fully desegregating public education in the United States. It aided in putting the Constitution on the side of racial equality and provided a spark to the civil rights movement.

11. Describe the significance of other court cases related to your case:
1903: Reynolds v. The Board of Education of Topeka
Black children were assigned to live in the older school building when the Lowman Hill District burned down, parents went to Court and lost. Kansas Supreme Court held that first class cities could operate separate elementary schools.
1905: Special Legislation for Kansas City, Kansas
Mamie Richardson suid the Board of Education of Kansas City when she wasn’t allowed to attend the Morning High School, two school sessions were kept divided by race.
There are over 15 related court cases to Brown v. Board of Education dating back to the 1840s, with many different outcomes yet one thing in common- race segregation in our education systems.

12. Identify the immediate impact and long- term impact on society from this case. Why is this case considered “Landmark”?
Short Term: The lawsuit became a multi- year campaign to persuade nine justices, with a group of five lawsuits against the Kansas school districts for Brown v. Board. Over 200 school desegregation cases remained open.
Long Term: The case didn’t completely end segregation in public schools, but takes credit as the biggest aid in fighting segregation. Today, children of all races can attend school together.
This case was considered a “landmark” United States Supreme Court case because the Court declared state laws that established separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional.