Test 3 Review

Test 3 Review - Chapter 9 Racial Equality and Equal...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Chapter 9 – Racial Equality and Equal Protection Intentional/Explicit use of Race under the 14 th amendment Early analysis of Equal Protection [1880-1950s] Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Black slave in Missouri sued his owner Supreme court ruled Missouri Compromise unconstitutional Court ruled slaves do not receive the same rights as citizens as they are not citizens because they are property Strauder v. West Virginia (1880) Ruled that state laws excluding blacks from jury panels are unconstitutional Blacks are citizens Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) Out of 200 applicants in San Francisco for laundry may permits in wood buildings one was allowed, and it was the only white applicant Court ruled that the application of the law was unconstitutional Civil Rights Cases (1883) Group of cases where blacks had sued different private enterprises for discrimination. Plessy v. Ferguson (1890) Group of black citizens organize Plessy to ride in white only train car in order to test the constitutionality of the law Court rules that the law is constitutional because the law was in place to promote harmony between the races The black race is socially inferior to the white race and the Constitution cannot put them upon the same plane The only question the supreme court had to ask was if the law was reasonable, separate but equal One dissenter wrote that all were equal under the constitution, many refer to this dissenting ruling today Race and Housing Shelley v. Kraemer (1948) Blacks bought house from white owner in a neighborhood restricted by law from selling of property to blacks Neighbor sued under the law and won Supreme court ruled that the law was constitutional but the state enforcement of such a law was unconstitutional Race and Education Sweatt v. Painter (1950) Black postman tries to get into UT Law school and is denied on basis of race UT is white only per the Texas legislature Sweatt sues for admission and state requires UT to open a negro law school within 6 months School opens up and Sweatt goes back to the district court and they rule against him stating comparable facilities available at both schools Backed by the NAACP and Thurgood Marshall he takes it to the supreme court and they rule in his favor Ordered sweats admission to UT stating no substantial equality First time court ordered black’s admittance to a school where a segregated school was in place Seeming though they were against segregation they refused to review plessy doctrine Brown v. Board of Education (1952)
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Ruled separate but equal doctrine unconstitutional Based on sociological and psychological evidence, dismissed any historical arguments Bolling v. Sharp The case from DC that was tied to the Brown case in the supreme court Ruled the same as the brown case except that it is applied under the 5 th amendment since it is under federal rule, the 14 th amend only applies to states De Jure and De facto Discrimination Race - Busing to achieve a racial balance Swan v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg (1971)
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 05/07/2008 for the course PSC 2302 taught by Professor Dr.riley during the Spring '08 term at Baylor.

Page1 / 8

Test 3 Review - Chapter 9 Racial Equality and Equal...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online