INTRODUCTION TO RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

1
INTRODUCTION TO RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

• 2/05/08

2
Bolling v. Sharpe (1954)

• See reference EW p. 655
• Decided same day as Brown I
• Challenged racial segregation in District of
  Columbia public schools.
• How does this decision differ from the one in
  Brown v. Bd.?

3
Bolling v. Sharpe (1954)

• Decided same day as Brown I
• FACTS
• Challenged racial segregation in District of
  Columbia public schools.
• SIGNIFICANCE OF DIFFERENCE IN FACTS
• Washington DC schools are considered to be part
  of the federal government rather than part of one
  of the state governments.
• 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause limits the
  state governmentsnot the federal gov.

4
Bolling v. Sharpe (1954)

• HOLDING
• It is a violation of the due process clause of
  5th amendment for the federal government to
  practice racial segregation in its schools.
• REASONING
• It was an arbitrary and unreasonable denial of
  plaintiff's right to liberty and property
  interest in getting a good education.
• SIGNIFICANCE OF RULING
• This case marks the beginning of an "equal
  protection component" in the 5th amendment.

5
Brown v. Bd of Education (1955)

• Remedy granted by the Court
• School districts are suppose to integrate with
  all deliberate speed.

6
Loving v. Virginia (1967)

• ISSUES
• Did the Virginia law banning interracial marriage
  violate the due process clause of the 14th
  amendment? YES (9-0)
• Did the Virginia law banning interracial marriage
  violate the equal protection clause of the 14th
  amendment? YES (9-0)

7
Loving v. Virginia (1967)

• HOLDING
• It is a violation of the equal protection and due
  process clauses of the 14th amendment for a state
  to prohibit interracial marriages.

8
Loving v. Virginia (1967)

• REASONING
• Court rules that marriage is a basic civil right
  and therefore cannot be denied on the basis of
  racial criteria.
• Its not a matter of discriminating against one
  race over another. It is unconstitutional to use
  race as the criteria for determining who can
  marry.

9
Palmore v. Sidoti (1984)

• HOLDING
• It is a violation of the equal protection clause
  of the 14th amendment for a state to remove a
  child from its parent on the basis of a racial
  classification.

10
Shelly v. Kraemer (1948)

• ISSUE
• Was it a violation of the equal protection
  clause of the 14th amendment for the Missouri
  courts to enforce the terms of a racially
  restrictive covenant contained in a deed for
  private property? YES
• HOLDING
• It is a violation of the equal protection clause
  of the 14th amendment for state courts to enforce
  racially restrictive covenants in the deeds of
  private landowners.

11
Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority (1961)

• ISSUE
• It is a violation of the equal protection clause
  of the 14th amendment for the Eagle Coffee Shoppe
  to discriminate on the basis of race? YES
• HOLDING
• It is a violation of the equal protection clause
  of the 14th amendment for a private restaurant
  that leases its space from a governmental entity
  to discriminate on the basis of race.