Brown V. Board Of Education Source Analysis

This source is the opinion of Chief Justice Earl Warren and has substantial value in revealing why the US Supreme Court attempted to rapidly desegregate public schools. The doctrine ‘separate but equal’ provided the legal basis for racial segregation from 1896 to 1954. To when the Supreme Court handed down the landmark decision Brown v Board of Education. The Justices declared that segregation by law violates the 14th Amendment of the constitution. Passed just after the civil war, the 14th Amendment guaranteed the rights to all citizens regardless of race. The overruling of the ‘Plessy v Ferguson’ – ‘separate but equal’ axiom was a turning point in black Americans civil rights, and it was hugely characterized by the unanimous 9-0 decision,

In 1954, The Brown v Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas case brought about a revolutionary success for black Americans, as it meant they would finally be granted equal rights. This source was pronounced a year later, questioning how effectively the desegregation of schools would be implemented. Chief Justice Earl Warren states that there should be a full compliance with the 1954 ruling that, separate is unconstitutional, and that the concept of ‘separate but equal’ facilities was inherently unequal. The source’s value is reinforced as it is a first-hand account of the Chief Justice that had a grave influence on persuading the judges to oppose segregation. Its value relies upon that fact that it is the direct opinion of Warren and he was an avid supporter of desegregation, therefore it can be derived from the origin of the source that the value of it, is heavily dependent on the point of view it is coming from. The publication date of the source was a year later than the Brown v Board of Education case insinuating that after their great achievement of the 9-0 decision, not much was done to desegregate schools – hence the US Supreme Court’s decision to rapidly integrate public

“Courts of equity may properly take into account the public interest in the elimination of such discrimination of such obstacles in a systematic and effective manner. But it should go without saying that the vitality of these constitutional principles cannot be allowed to yield simply because of disagreements with them”. Chief Justice Earl Warren goes into further detail about how the system was not set up to implement the 14th Amendment effectively – thus proving how the it was unconstitutional – which was his main argument in successfully overruling the ‘Plessy v