McLaurin (plaintiff) was a Black citizen of Oklahoma. We hold that under these circumstances the Fourteenth Amendment precludes differences in treatment by the state based upon race. With him on the brief was Mac Q. Williamson, Attorney General. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents is a case that was decided on June 5, 1950, by the United States Supreme Court holding that a state cannot treat a student differently on the basis of race. 87 F.Supp. Appellant is a Negro citizen of Oklahoma. Those who will come under his guidance and influence must be directly affected by the education he receives. (1950) 455, 456, 457. The primary purpose of the 14th Amendment was to extend rights and protections found in the Constitution to the states. It is vital that students have the opportunity to learn from all of their other peers. Further, the Court ruled that "discrimination had no place in education." 0000071278 00000 n (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. 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. State-imposed restrictions which produce such inequalities cannot be sustained. WebThis case and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. 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 WebGeorge W. McLaurin was an Oklahoma citizen and an African-American. WebMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. The intent of the 14th Amendment was to extend rights found in the Constitution to the states. 87 F. Supp. The student was assigned to seating in the classroom, library, and cafeteria that was specified for Black students. 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 [339 U.S. 637, 639] of the equal protection of the laws. (2012.201.B0391.0687, Oklahoma Publishing Company Photography Collection, OHS). US Supreme Court. 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. 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. 851, 94 L.Ed. Dist.) The U.S. Supreme Court heard McLaurin's appeal in April 1950 and in June unanimously reversed the lower court. 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. George McLaurin sued for equal protection under the 14th Amendment. See Sweatt v. Painter, ante, p. 629. WebOther articles where Sweatt v. Painter is discussed: Brown v. Board of Education: Decision: the Supreme Courts rulings in Sweatt v. Painter (1950) and McLaurin v. Oklahoma Use this button to switch between dark and light mode. McLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. 0000067207 00000 n 87 F. Supp. The U.S. Supreme Court held that "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.". 526 (W.D. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents [ 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. 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. Click here to contact us for media inquiries, and please donate here to support our continued expansion. 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. It further held that to the extent the Oklahoma statutes denied him admission they were unconstitutional and void. 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. Make your practice more effective and efficient with Casetexts legal research suite. But they signify that the State, in administering the facilities it affords for professional and graduate study, sets McLaurin apart from the other students. Omissions? The individual filed a complaint on the grounds that his right to equal protection had been violated by the school's actions. Do you find this information helpful? 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. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. Appellant, having been admitted to a state-supported graduate school, must receive the same treatment at the hands of the state as students of other races. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, (339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. 528. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents is a case that was decided on June 5, 1950, by the United States Supreme Court holding that a state cannot treat a student differently on the 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.". 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. The Court concluded that the conditions under which appellant were required to receive his education deprived him of his personal and present rights to the equal protection of the laws. 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. Our society grows increasingly complex, and our need for trained leaders increases correspondingly. That court held that such treatment did not violate the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment and denied the motion. 20 0 obj <> endobj xref 20 27 0000000016 00000 n 851, 94 L.Ed. 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.' The school authorities were required to exclude him by the Oklahoma statutes, 70 Okla. Stat. As a result of the amended Oklahoma law, the plaintiff was assigned to sit in a row of classroom seats reserved for African American students, had to sit at an assigned table in the library, and, while he was allowed to eat in the cafeteria, he had a designated table. The judgment is reversed. On January 28, 1948, a retired black professor, George McLaurin, applied to the University of Oklahoma to pursue a Doctorate in Education. Id. 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. McLaurin returned to the U.S. District court and petitioned to require the University of Oklahoma to remove the separate facilities allowing him to interact with the other students fully (87 F. Supp. Civ. We hold that under these circumstances the Fourteenth Amendment precludes differences in treatment by the state based upon race. The removal of the state restrictions will not necessarily abate individual and group predilections, prejudices and choices. WebIn McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra, the Court, in requiring that a Negro admitted to a white graduate school be treated like all other students, again resorted to intangible considerations: ". Policy: Christopher Nelson Caitlin Styrsky Molly Byrne Jimmy McAllister Samuel Postell This segregated him from his classmates and made group learning and discussions impossible. 70 S.Ct. Citing our decisions in Missouri ex rel. The judgment is Reversed. 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. Casetext, Inc. and Casetext are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice. 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. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education et al. [ Footnote 1 ] 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. 70 Okla. Stat. The Voting Rights Act Age 17 The Voting Rights Act prohibits racial discrimination in voting. Your donation is fully tax-deductible. 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. (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. Name Meaning Pitts Linda Joan 1 English: variant of Pitt .2 Americanized spelling of German Pitz . United States District Court W. D. 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. Decided June 5, 1950. He was allowed to pursue his doctoral degree at the University of Oklahoma. Robert L. Carter and Amos T. Hall argued the cause for appellant. Appellant was thereupon admitted to the University of Oklahoma Graduate School. In a unanimous decision authored by Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson, the Supreme Court reversed the lower courts decision. McLaurin successfully sued in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma to gain admission to the institution (87 F. Supp. 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. 640-641. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, an important case leading up to the U.S. Supreme Court's 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education, struck down the Oklahoma statute that mandated 0000071186 00000 n McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 87 F. Supp. At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. To remove these conditions, appellant filed a motion to modify the order and judgment of the District Court. 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. The removal of the state restrictions will not necessarily abate individual and group predilections, prejudices and choices. It had two major clauses: due process and equal protection. 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. Xi 87 F. Supp. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, https://www.britannica.com/event/McLaurin-v-Oklahoma-State-Regents, BlackPast - McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, Cornell Law School - Legal Information Institute - McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. 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. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950) McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. 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. Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections, San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia, New York City Transit Authority v. Beazer. BlackPast.org is a 501(c)(3) non-profit and our EIN is 26-1625373. With them on the brief were Thurgood [339 U.S. 637, 638] Marshall and Frank D. Reeves. 0000001774 00000 n Terms of Use About the Encyclopedia. - 339 U.S. 637, 70 S. Ct. 851 (1950) Rule: Where conditions exist where a student of color is required to receive his These restrictions were obviously imposed in order to comply, as nearly as could be, with the statutory requirements of Oklahoma. 247, a statutory three-judge District Court held, 87 F.Supp. WebMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA DEPT. The U.S. Supreme Court was clear in its verbiage that a major part of education is the discussion and "comingling" of intellectual abilities. Both students sued, and the U.S. Susan Cianci Salvatore (September 1, 2001), U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, Post Office, Courthouse, and Federal Office Building, NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, Sipuel v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, List of landmark African-American legislation, List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 339, public domain material from this U.S government document, National Historic Landmark Nomination: Bizzell Library, University of Oklahoma, Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms, Cooperative Institute for Mesoscale Meteorological Studies, Julian P. Kanter Political Commercial Archive, Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Communication, College of Atmospheric and Geographic Sciences, Weitzenhoffer Family College of Fine Arts. Subscribe Now. HW1C~NR In this ruling and its companion case, Sweatt v. Painter, decided on the same day, the Supreme Court held that African American students must receive the same treatment as all other students in the realm of higher education. Argued April 3-4, 1950. 339 U. S. 640-641. 854] the Supreme Court struck down "restrictions imposed by the state which prohibit the intellectual commingling of students," not social commingling or commingling generally. O'Gorman & Young, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth, City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. The Civil Rights Movement Begins Age 12 The civil rights movement was a movement to enforce constitutional and legal rights for African Americans that the other Americans enjoyed. Dist. Thus he was required to sit apart at a designated desk in an anteroom adjoining the classroom; to sit at a designated desk on the mezzanine floor of the library, but not to use the desks in the regular reading room; and to sit at a designated table and to eat at a different time from the other students in the school cafeteria. On appeal, the Supreme Court focused on the question of whether officials could treat a student at a state university differently from other students based solely on his race. Hoping to earn a doctorate in education, he applied for admission to graduate study at Oklahoma's all Dictionary of American Family Names Patrick Hanks 2003, 2006. McLaurin had to sit at a separate table in classrooms, the library, and the cafeteria. Click here to contact our editorial staff, and click here to report an error. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. 0000006506 00000 n Appellant [339 U.S. 637, 640] was thereupon admitted to the University of Oklahoma Graduate School. %PDF-1.4 % McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents helped to abolish this policy, specifically in colleges and universities. In 1948, McLaurin applied for admission to the doctoral program in the College of Education, directly challenging the states current segregation laws. George McLaurin George McLaurin was the first African American student admitted to the University of Oklahoma. Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1, 13 -14 (1948). Citing our decisions in State of Missouri ex rel. 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. She has been a classroom teacher for the past ten years. 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. Where a black student was admitted to a state-supported graduate school, he must receive the same treatment at the hands ofthe state as students of other races. Possible Related Names Pitt Pitz 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 . The experience needed for a good education could not be accomplished by physically separating McLaurin from his peers, and it disallowed him from working on many types of projects that involved one or more students, as well as participating in a discussion of any kind. WebPeriodical U.S. Reports: McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950). Please select which sections you would like to print: Encyclopaedia Britannica's editors oversee subject areas in which they have extensive knowledge, whether from years of experience gained by working on that content or via study for an advanced degree. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE VINSON delivered the opinion of the Court. Thus he was required to sit apart at a designated desk in an anteroom adjoining the classroom; to sit at a designated desk on the mezzanine floor of the library, but not to use the desks in the regular reading room; and to sit at a designated table and to eat at a different time from the other students in the school cafeteria. 851, 94 L.Ed. 70 Okla.Stat.Ann. [2][3] The case was heard in Oklahoma City at the Post Office, Courthouse, and Federal Office Building. Segregating a population also segregates the experiences and voices of that population. 0000062723 00000 n Shelley v. Kraemer, 1948, 334 U.S. 1, 13-14, 68 S.Ct. Ann. The unanimous decision was delivered on the same day as another case involving similar issues, Sweatt v. Painter. 0000067006 00000 n Those who will come under his guidance and influence must be directly affected by the education he receives. 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. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. Read More opinion of Vinson In Fred M. Vinson to white persons only ( Shelley v. Kraemer, 1948). But they signify that the State, in administering the facilities it affords for professional and graduate study, sets McLaurin apart from the other students. As a result, much of the South adopted "separate but equal" policies that governed daily life. The judgment below is reversed, p. 339 U. S. 642. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, 339 U.S. 637. The sign that hung around the students sites in the classroom stating Reserved for Colored was removed, and he was assigned to a table on the main floor of the library; his previous table was on the mezzanine level.
Richie Sambora New Jersey Guitar Rig, Dr Patel Chicago Dentist, Michigan Pagan Festival 2022, Lock Haven Wrestling Coach Fired, Articles M