Appellant is a Negro citizen of Oklahoma. Their own education and development will necessarily suffer to the extent that his training is unequal to that of his classmates. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Ed., 87 F. Supp. He wanted to have an education that was similar to his peers. This precedent would be echoed in the 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled that it was unconstitutional to segregate public schools. 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. The result is that appellant is handicapped in his pursuit of effective graduate instruction. 0000062655 00000 n Okla. 1948) October 6, 1948 87 F. Supp. McLaurin appealed to the United States Supreme Court on the basis that he was being denied equal protection under the 14th Amendment. The University admitted McLaurin but provided him separate facilities, including a special table in the cafeteria, a designated desk in the library, a desk just outside the classroom doorway, and sometimes even made him eat at different times than the other students. 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. 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]). Terms of Use About the Encyclopedia. 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. An Oklahoma law permitted Black Pp. This we think irrelevant. 0000071802 00000 n Civ. 0000007159 00000 n 0000067006 00000 n To remove these conditions, appellant filed a motion to modify the order and judgment of the District Court. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. 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. (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. copyright 2003-2023 Study.com. Its like a teacher waved a magic wand and did the work for me. [1], Chief Justice Frederick Vinson, writing for the court, argued that the actions of the University of Oklahoma violated the student's constitutional right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. 0000005065 00000 n Ballotpedia features 408,463 encyclopedic articles written and curated by our professional staff of editors, writers, and researchers. 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. 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. U.S. Supreme CourtMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950), McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. 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 segregation in education. Mark Tushnet, Making Civil Rights Law: Thurgood Marshall and the Supreme Court, 19361961 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). 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." She is certified in English and Special Education. These restrictions were obviously imposed in order to comply, as nearly as could be, with the statutory requirements of Oklahoma. WebG.W. The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture, Oklahoma Heritage Preservation Grant Program. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. He was allowed to pursue his doctoral degree at the University of Oklahoma. Klarman elaborates on the social, political, and economic factors that shaped the judicial rulings on this case, as well as the many ways in which the final . At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. Chief Justice Frederick Vinson delivered the opinion of the court. 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. At the time, Oklahoma law prohibited schools from instructing blacks and whites together. 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. In 1948, McLaurin applied for admission to the doctoral program in the College of Education, directly challenging the states current segregation laws. 0000067207 00000 n 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. State-imposed restrictions which produce such inequalities cannot be sustained. 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. McLaurin won the right to attend the University of Oklahoma; however, Oklahoma simply amended its laws to say that while African Americans could attend white institutions, they must be segregated. The judgment below is reversed, p. 339 U. S. 642. 70 Okla. Stat. The school authorities were required to exclude him by the Oklahoma statutes, 70 Okla. Stat. Our editors will review what youve submitted and determine whether to revise the article. 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. 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 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. 851, 94 L.Ed. With him on the brief was Mac Q. Williamson, Attorney General. (1950) 455, 456, 457. 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 basis of race. Appellant is a Negro citizen of Oklahoma. Using sweeping language, the Supreme Court acknowledged that, because American society was changing, discrimination based on race had no place in education. In McLaurin, the Supreme Court found that an African-American student should be admitted to a white graduate school, and be treated like other students, because of the importance of his "ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and in general to learn his profession.". Sturdivant v. Blue Valley Unified Sch. WebIn 1892, Homer Plessy who was seven-eighths Caucasian agreed to participate in a test to challenge the Act. 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. 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. The judgment below is reversed, p. 642. 339 U. S. 638-642. 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. Pp. This we think irrelevant. His application was rejected because state law prohibited black Further, the Court ruled that "discrimination had no place in education." Their own education and development will necessarily suffer to the extent that his training is unequal to that of his classmates. '1 Appellant was thereupon admitted to the University of Oklahoma Graduate School. At the time, an Oklahoma law made it a misdemeanor to operate, teach at, or attend an educational institution that admitted both white and black students. The removal of the state restrictions will not necessarily abate individual and group predilections, prejudices and choices. Different treatment of students in public institutions of higher learning solely on the basis of race violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. But they signify that the State, in administering the facilities it affords for professional and graduate study, sets McLaurin apart from the other students. 0000062265 00000 n WebGeorge W. McLaurin was an Oklahoma citizen and an African-American. 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. Eventually, McLaurin won admittance to the school, but the fight was far from over. 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. Yes. This appeal followed. 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. They write new content and verify and edit content received from contributors. 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 526. 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. 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. Dictionary of American Family Names Patrick Hanks 2003, 2006. 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. It is said that the separations imposed by the State in this case are in form merely nominal. Such reasoning, though common in courts up to that time, was about to lose all legitimacy. Learn about the court case of McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents with a summary and case brief. 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. Marian W. Perry and Franklin H. Williams were also of counsel. (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. of City of Benton Harbor. Our society grows increasingly complex, and our need for trained leaders increases correspondingly. With them on the brief were Thurgood [339 U.S. 637, 638] Marshall and Frank D. Reeves. No. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education et al. Click here to contact us for media inquiries, and please donate here to support our continued expansion. At school, he was made to sit at separate tables in his classes, the library, and the cafeteria. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra [ 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. The result is that appellant is handicapped in his pursuit of effective graduate instruction. 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. See Sweatt v. Painter, ante, p. 629. McLaurin v. Oklahoma was one of the cases that helped to overturn Plessy v. Ferguson. That court held that such treatment did not violate the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment and denied the motion. 87 F. Supp. 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. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. The court thus concluded that the Fourteenth Amendment precluded the enforcement of the Oklahoma statute that required African American students to be treated differently from other students. At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. Ann. 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. Policy: Christopher Nelson Caitlin Styrsky Molly Byrne Jimmy McAllister Samuel Postell 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. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. Sweatt v. Painter: Summary, Decision & Significance, Feiner v. New York (1951): Case Brief, Significance & Facts, Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, Dennis v. United States: Summary, Significance & Decision, Stack v. Boyle (1951): Case Brief, Facts & Decision, Rochin v. California: Case Brief, Summary & Significance, Beauharnais v. Illinois: Summary & Dissent, United States v. Reynolds (1953): Summary & Dissenting Opinion, Hernandez v. Texas: Summary & Significance, Praxis Social Studies: Content Knowledge (5081) Prep, Praxis Earth and Space Sciences: Content Knowledge (5571) Prep, Praxis Core Academic Skills for Educators - Writing (5723): Study Guide & Practice, ILTS TAP - Test of Academic Proficiency (400): Practice & Study Guide, Praxis Biology: Content Knowledge (5235) Prep, Introduction to American Government: Certificate Program, Introduction to Counseling: Certificate Program, Praxis Business Education: Content Knowledge (5101) Prep, Sociology 103: Foundations of Gerontology, NY Regents Exam - Global History and Geography: Tutoring Solution, Jane Seymour & Henry VIII: Facts & History, The Battle of Lake Erie in 1813: Summary & Facts, Annapolis Convention of 1786: Definition & Overview, The Trent Affair of 1861: Definition & Summary, Invention of the Telegraph: History & Overview, Who Were Lewis and Clark? Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. 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. AFRICAN AMERICANS, BROOKSVILLE, CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, ROSCOE DUNJEE, ADA LOIS SIPUEL FISHER, AMOS T. HALL, NAACP, SEGREGATION, UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA. Appellant, a Negro 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. 87 F.Supp. The case was decided on June 5, 1950. 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. The decision in this case was made in conjunction with Sweatt v. Painter and later influenced the decision in Brown v. Board of Education.[1]. Heyne's factual allegations state a plausible claim against Manuel for violation of his right to equal, Geier, 801 F.2d at 805.Missouri ex rel. WebSupreme Court case McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents School ruled that public institutions of higher learning could not discriminate due to race. Possible Related Names Pitt Pitz Mr. Fred Hansen, Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellees. 87 F. Supp. Appellant [339 U.S. 637, 640] was thereupon admitted to the University of Oklahoma Graduate School. 0000001912 00000 n Tech: Matt Latourelle Ryan Burch Kirsten Corrao Beth Dellea Travis Eden Tate Kamish Margaret Kearney Eric Lotto Joseph Sanchez. George McLaurin sued for equal protection under the 14th Amendment. WebMCLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS, 339 U.S. 637 (1950) Reset A A Font size: Print United States Supreme Court McLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS State survey of the federal grant review process, State responses to the federal grant review process survey, 2021, State responses by question to the federal grant review process survey, 2021, Federalism by the numbers: Federal mandates, Federalism by the numbers: Federal grants-in-aid, Federalism by the numbers: Federal information collection requests, Overview of federal spending during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, Full text of case syllabus and opinions (Justia), Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy, https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=McLaurin_v._Oklahoma_State_Regents&oldid=8950237, Pages using DynamicPageList3 dplreplace parser function, Federalism court cases, equal protection clause, Conflicts in school board elections, 2021-2022, Special Congressional elections (2023-2024), 2022 Congressional Competitiveness Report, State Executive Competitiveness Report, 2022, State Legislative Competitiveness Report, 2022, Partisanship in 2022 United States local elections. 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. The individual filed a complaint on the grounds that his right to equal protection had been violated by the school's actions. 0000004461 00000 n The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to segregate McLaurin from his peers. (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. While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1, 13-14 (1948). 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. Decided June 5, 1950. 0000071254 00000 n WebBoard of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 332 U.S. 631; cf. In 1950 a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that McLaurin had not received equal treatment as required by the Constitution. WebMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA DEPT. Read More opinion of Vinson In Fred M. Vinson to white persons only ( Shelley v. Kraemer, 1948). The ruling in McLaurin had major ramifications for both parties and went on to set a new precedent regarding segregation, especially with how it pertained to education. 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. United States District Court W. D. 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. Oklahoma Historical Society800 Nazih Zuhdi Drive, Oklahoma City, OK 73105 | 405-521-2491Site Index | Contact Us | Privacy | Press Room | Website Inquiries, Get Updates in Your Inbox Keep up to date with our weekly newsletter delivered straight to your inbox. To remove these conditions, appellant filed a motion to modify the order and judgment of the District Court. We decide only this issue; see Sweatt v. Painter, ante, p. 629. These restrictions were obviously imposed in order to comply, as nearly as could be, with the statutory requirements of Oklahoma. Fred Hansen, First Assistant Attorney General of Oklahoma, argued the cause for appellees. He is now assigned to a seat in the classroom in a row specified for colored students; he is assigned to a table in the library on the main floor; and he is permitted to eat at the same time in the cafeteria as other students, although here again he is assigned to a special table. 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. Those who will come under his guidance and influence must be directly affected by the education he receives. 455. HM0O0wz,['+hQ#H pt}~es9p~(/W3&5YfqL4Q7F:6[QcsWP\~)gLBsDhjB`9L[{kNu2[/(DSm:o_zX?aEEn^)}UXR}2 wF%. McLaurin 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 with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 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. 526. 1149, it was ruled that a state may not after having admitted a Negro student to graduate instruction in its state university afford him different treatment from other students solely because of his race. Argued April 3-4, 1950. Messrs. Amos T. Hall, Tulsa, Okl., Robert L. Carter, Washington, D.C., for appellant. All rights reserved. WebOn January 14, 1946, the petitioner, a Negro, concededly qualified to receive the professional legal education offered by the State, applied for admission to the School of Law of the University of Oklahoma, the only institution for legal education supported and maintained by the taxpayers of the Oklahoma.
© 2023 Lembecker TV 1974 e.V.