mclaurin v oklahoma summary

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. It is said that the separations imposed by the State in this case are in form merely nominal. The amendment provided, however, that in such cases the program of instruction shall be given at such colleges or institutions of higher education upon a segregated basis [1]. The student filed a complaint for injunctive relief, claiming that the statute was unconstitutional because it deprived him of equal protection of the laws. The removal of the state restrictions will not necessarily abate individual and group predilections, prejudices and choices. 0000002024 00000 n 70 Okla. Stat. The unanimous decision was delivered on the same day as another case involving similar issues, Sweatt v. Painter. Segregating a population also segregates the experiences and voices of that population. This appeal followed. (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. Marian W. Perry and Franklin H. Williams were also of counsel. Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions. With them on the brief were Thurgood [339 U.S. 637, 638] Marshall and Frank D. Reeves. In the McLaurin case, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the University of Oklahoma had violated the equal protection clause because the experience needed for a good education could not be accomplished by physically separating McLaurin. 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. 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 [339 U.S. 637, 641] of location. %PDF-1.4 % Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login). US Supreme Court. As a result, the court pointed out, the plaintiff was held back in pursuit of his education, because he was unable to debate and discuss his ideas with other students and faculty, with the result that his ability to learn his chosen profession, teaching, was hampered. At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. 851, 94 L.Ed. Fred Hansen, First Assistant Attorney General of Oklahoma, argued the cause for appellees. However, McLaurin appealed and his case went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Although the court declared that the statute allowing officials to deny the student admission to the program was null and void, it refused to grant his request for an injunction, assuming that officials would follow the constitutional mandate in its order. WebPainter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents [both 1950]). Their own education and development will necessarily suffer to the extent that his training is unequal to that of his classmates. Public facilities like bathrooms and water fountains were segregated. Supreme Court 339 U.S. 637 70 S.Ct. U.S. Supreme CourtMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950), McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. 0000001099 00000 n 0000062061 00000 n Our society grows increasingly complex, and our need for trained leaders increases correspondingly. Brianna has her undergraduate degree in English Education and her master's degree in Urban Education. P. 642. 836, 842, 92 L.Ed. In fact, as the court noted, the restrictions were designed to comply with the state statute that had required officials in institutions of higher education to treat students differently based on their races. Our society grows increasingly complex, and our need for trained leaders increases correspondingly. WebMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. Upon suit filed by the applicant, the university tried to set up a separate facility for African-American law students. George W. McLaurin applied to the University of Oklahoma but was denied entry because he was African American. 0000007159 00000 n Pursuant to a requirement of state law, 70 Okla. Stat. 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. The U.S. Supreme Court heard McLaurin's appeal in April 1950 and in June unanimously reversed the lower court. . But at the very least, the state will not be depriving appellant of the opportunity [339 U.S. 637, 642] to secure acceptance by his fellow students on his own merits. BlackPast.org is a 501(c)(3) non-profit and our EIN is 26-1625373. It may be argued that appellant will be in no better position when these restrictions are removed, for he may still be set apart by his fellow students. Citing our decisions in Missouri ex rel. [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. Appellant's 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. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. 320 lessons. Individual users must determine if their use of the Materials falls under United States copyright law's "Fair Use" guidelines and does not infringe on the proprietary rights of the Oklahoma Historical Society as the legal copyright holder of The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and part or in whole. (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. 851, 94 L.Ed. 34. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Ed., 87 F. Supp. The Court held that it was unconstitutional under the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to deny McLaurin an equal education to the one his white peers were receiving. 0000067207 00000 n We decide only this issue; see Sweatt v. Painter, ante, p. 629. 526. 0000071278 00000 n The following (as per The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition) is the preferred citation for articles:Alfred L. Brophy, McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950), The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture, https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=MC034. Learn about the court case of McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents with a summary and case brief. Omissions? All Rights Reserved. In that ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutional to segregate people, as long as each group received equal protection under the law. Even so, the court retained jurisdiction of the case in order to provide the student with equal protection of the laws with regard to his education. Casetext, Inc. and Casetext are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice. Their own education and development will necessarily suffer to the extent that his training is unequal to that of his classmates. 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. 528. George McLaurin sued for equal protection under the 14th Amendment. His case set a precedent through which may laws regarding segregation were struck down. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE VINSON delivered the opinion of the Court. 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. 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). Ablack citizen of Oklahoma possessing a master's 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. Appellant is a Negro citizen of Oklahoma. his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." There is a vast difference a Constitutional difference between restrictions imposed by the state which prohibit the intellectual commingling of students, and the refusal of individuals to commingle where the state presents no such bar. 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 . (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. With them on the brief were Thurgood Marshall and Frank D. Reeves. 851 [ 94 L.Ed. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. 526. Decided June 5, 1950. (1950) 455, 456, 457. 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. WebO'Connor. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950), was a United States Supreme Court case that prohibited racial segregation in state supported graduate or professional education. Id. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 640 (1950). The proceedings below are stated in the opinion. rG' Out of this came the "separate but equal" policies of the post-Reconstruction South. The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture, Oklahoma Heritage Preservation Grant Program. Ann. Contractors of America v. Jacksonville, Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. Following this decision, the Oklahoma legislature amended these statutes to permit the admission of Negroes to institutions of higher learning attended by white students, in cases where such institutions offered courses not available in the Negro schools. Decided June 5, 1950. - Discoveries, Timeline & Facts, Presidential Election of 1848: Summary, Candidates & Results, Lord Charles Cornwallis: Facts, Biography & Quotes, Charles Maurice de Talleyrand: Quotes & Biography, Who is Jose de San Martin? The case McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents began when the University of Oklahoma denied George McLaurin into its graduate program because of his race. 87 F. Supp. The federal court in Oklahoma City upheld the discrimination, observing that the Constitution "does not abolish distinctions based upon race . Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) had made segregation a standard practice in much of the American South. Appellant's 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. 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. This we think irrelevant. It was not until 1950 that the Supreme Court ruled that the treatment must be equal between White and African American students. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 87 F. Supp. Users agree not to download, copy, modify, sell, lease, rent, reprint, or otherwise distribute these materials, or to link to these materials on another web site, without authorization of the Oklahoma Historical Society. (b) That appellant may still be set apart by his fellow students and may be in no better position when these restrictions are removed is irrelevant, for there is a constitutional difference between restrictions imposed by the State which prohibit the intellectual commingling of students and the refusal of students to commingle where the State presents no such bar. if(document.getElementsByClassName("reference").length==0) if(document.getElementById('Footnotes')!==null) document.getElementById('Footnotes').parentNode.style.display = 'none'; Communications: Alison Graves Carley Allensworth Abigail Campbell Sarah Groat Erica Shumaker Caitlin Vanden Boom 247, a statutory three-judge District Court held, 87 F.Supp. (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. As a result, much of the South adopted "separate but equal" policies that governed daily life. (b) That appellant may still be set apart by his fellow students and may be in no better position when these restrictions are removed is irrelevant, for there is a constitutional difference between restrictions imposed by the State which prohibit the intellectual commingling of students and the refusal of students to commingle where the State presents no such bar. There is a vast differencea Constitutional differencebetween restrictions imposed by the state which prohibit the intellectual commingling of students, and the refusal of individuals to commingle where the state presents no such bar. The Supreme Court noted that the special treatment McLaurin received because of his race set him apart from the other students. They write new content and verify and edit content received from contributors. Your donation is fully tax-deductible. McLaurin argued that due to this treatment, he was being deprived of his rights under the 14 Amendment. 1149 (1950), the petitioner, who was black, was admitted to the state's formerly white only graduate school, but was compelled to sit in a "colored only" row in the classroom, a "colored only" table in the library and a "colored only" table for meals in the cafeteria. Sturdivant v. Blue Valley Unified Sch. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. The proceedings below are stated in the opinion. McLaurin filed an injunction in federal court with the argument that the University of Oklahoma had denied him his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. McLaurin (plaintiff) was a Black citizen of Oklahoma. 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. He may wait in line in the cafeteria and there stand and talk with his fellow students, but while he eats he must remain apart. It had two major clauses: due process and equal protection. 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. 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. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. WebThe school districts appealed, claiming that the federal courts did not have jurisdiction over education, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately upheld McCormicks decision on April 14, 1947, ruling that the schools actions violated California law. 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. At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. Appellant filed a complaint requesting injunctive relief, alleging that the action of the school authorities and the statutes upon which their action was based were unconstitutional and deprived him of the equal protection of the laws. Click here to contact us for media inquiries, and please donate here to support our continued expansion. 0000005810 00000 n Create an account to start this course today. This segregated him from his classmates and made group learning and discussions impossible. I would definitely recommend Study.com to my colleagues. Appellant [339 U.S. 637, 640] was thereupon admitted to the University of Oklahoma Graduate School. For some time, the section of the classroom in which appellant sat was surrounded by a rail on which there was a sign stating, Reserved For Colored, but these have been removed. 0000071802 00000 n McLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. This precedent would be echoed in the 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled that it was unconstitutional to segregate public schools. George McLaurin George McLaurin was the first African American student admitted to the University of Oklahoma. WebMcLaurin v Oklahoma showed how the "separate but equal" provision can still be manipulated in a way that discriminates against individuals on the basis of race. 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 In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. The judgment below is reversed, p. 339 U. S. 642. Our editors will review what youve submitted and determine whether to revise the article. 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. No part of this site may be construed as in the public domain. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950), was a United States Supreme Court case that prohibited racial segregation in state supported graduate or professional education. 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.". 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. African American History: Research Guides & Websites, Global African History: Research Guides & Websites, African American Scientists and Technicians of the Manhattan Project, Envoys, Diplomatic Ministers, & Ambassadors, Foundation, Organization, and Corporate Supporters.
Tarrant County Jail Mugshots, Articles M