excerpt from: Brown v. Board of Education
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Warren
HS / Social Studies
Civics, Justice, Equality, Identity, Segregation
Ask participants to jot down and discuss the following questions: “What does separate
but equal mean? Where do you find examples of separation or segregation in your life?
Is life ever equal?”
Distribute the text and ask participants to anticipate what they expect this reading to be
like. Note to participants that this is an excerpt from the opinion that stood as law,
reversing Plessy v. Ferguson. Ask students to think about how this excerpt is organized.
How is it similar and different to other texts they know? Students should label the
paragraphs 1-9, making note that paragraph 9 continues onto the last page. “It is so
ordered” will not count as a paragraph, but rather be referred to as the last line in the
decision. Read the text aloud whole-class. Double-space the text before distribution for
the Vocabulary Development and the Analytical Read.
1
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas 347 U.S. 483 (1954), was a landmark
United States Supreme Court case in which the Court declared state laws establishing
separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional. The
decision overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson decision of 1896, which allowed statesponsored segregation, insofar as it applied to public education. Handed down on May
17, 1954, the Warren Court's unanimous (9–0) decision stated "separate educational
facilities are inherently unequal." As a result, de jure racial segregation was ruled a
violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United
States Constitution.
For much of the sixty years preceding the Brown case, race relations in the U.S. had
been dominated by racial segregation. This policy had been endorsed in 1896 by the
United States Supreme Court case of Plessy v. Ferguson, which held that as long as
the separate facilities for the separate races were equal, segregation did not violate the
Fourteenth Amendment ("no State shall... deny to any person... the equal protection of
the laws.").
The plaintiffs in Brown asserted that this system of racial separation, while
masquerading as providing separate but equal treatment of both white and black
Americans, instead perpetuated inferior accommodations, services, and treatment for
black Americans. Racial segregation in education varied widely from the 17 states that
required racial segregation to the 16 in which it was prohibited.
(Background information courtesy of Wikipedia, May 2015.)
Provide (or mine participants for) definitions for vocabulary which may prove difficult:
segregation, deprives, plaintiffs, compulsory, expenditures, tangible, inferiority, status,
compelled, detrimental, colored children, retard, amply, contrary, Due Process Clause,
Fourteenth Amendment, applicability, formulation, constitutionality, docket, reargument,
amici curiae.
Please see Analytical Read in conjunction with Vocabulary Development for a
suggested approach to addressing this extensive word list.
(Post directions.) Have participants work in pairs after the class has defined key
vocabulary terms and paraphrase the text in language that is readily understood. Next,
have participants mark words and points of interest (!) as well as those that still puzzle
(?), limiting these to three each. Participants should also consider independently how
the text is organized, and write a title word in the margin, that best summarizes each of
the 9 paragraphs. Finally, based on the text, have students craft a possible question
2
they could put forth in seminar or post-seminar.
 What word or phrase from the text best summarizes the Supreme Court’s
ruling? (round-robin response)
 Why? (spontaneous discussion)
 The second paragraph opens with…“Today, education is perhaps the
most important function of state and local governments.” Do you agree
with the reasoning Justice Warren goes on to outline, sixty years later?
 Where do you find the Court’s best argument supporting that…“separate
educational facilities are inherently unequal (paragraph 8)"?
 “To separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely
because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in
the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely
ever to be undone.” What does this mean? Do you agree?
 What line or section from the text is most relevant for us to discuss and
consider 60+ years later?
3
 Based on your own experience, is separate ever equal? What factors and
circumstances impact your response?
Participants are encouraged to revisit notes they jotted on their text, and in the Launch.
Ask students to link the Launch ideas to the text and discussion in one way. Jot that
connection down.
After reading and discussing Brown v. Board, write an opinion blog in which you discuss
the premise that… “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” and evaluate
the importance of Brown v. Board as a decision to study for the 21st century. Support
your position with evidence from the text. (Argumentation/Evaluation)
(LDC Task#:
6 )
4
Participants can use the Launch writing, class seminar dialogue, as well as Transition to
Writing.
Allow a few minutes for all to revisit the text, draft an outline for their blog, and refine
their thinking. Have students use an organizational template as needed. While it is a
more informal piece of writing, it should be thorough and convincing, even if the
language use and structure are less formal.
Challenge all to draft their blog by careful attention to the prompt. Be sure the prompt is
easily accessible.
Have participants work in pairs to read their first drafts aloud to each other with
emphasis on reader as creator and editor. The reader should make a special note to
signify to the listener:
a) the paraphrased understanding of the main premise of Brown v. Board and
b) the evaluation of the importance of its continued study.
The listener says back one point heard clearly, how it is supported by the text, and asks
one question for clarification. Roles are then switched. Give time for full revisions
resulting in a second draft.
Once the second draft is complete, have participants work in groups of three-four and
this time take turns reading each other’s second drafts slowly and silently, marking any
spelling or grammar errors they find. (Have dictionaries and grammar handbooks
available for reference.) Take this opportunity to clarify/reteach any specific grammar
strategies you have identified your students needing. Give time for full revisions
resulting in a third and final draft.
Publish the blogs as appropriate for classroom access and school protocol. Encourage
responses, and track how folks feel about the decision—and the need to continue to
study it 60 some years later. Share responses to blogs, and work with original student
authors to see if a trend can be identified.
5
Kelly Foster
National Paideia Center
6
excerpt from Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
Supreme Court Ruling Opinion, as delivered by Chief Justice Earl Warren
In approaching this problem, we cannot turn the clock back to 1868, when the
Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896, when Plessy v. Ferguson was written. We
must consider public education in the light of its full development and its present place
in American life throughout the Nation. Only in this way can it be determined if
segregation in public schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the
laws.
Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local
governments. Compulsory school attendance laws and the great expenditures for
education both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education to our
democratic society. It is required in the performance of our most basic public
responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good
citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in
preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his
environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to
succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity,
where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to
all on equal terms.
We come then to the question presented: does segregation of children in public schools
solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible"
factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational
opportunities? We believe that it does.
In Sweatt v. Painter, supra, in finding that a segregated law school for Negroes could
not provide them equal educational opportunities, this Court relied in large part on
"those qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for
greatness in a law school." In 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: ". . . his ability to study, to engage
in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his
profession."
7
Such considerations apply with added force to children in grade and high schools. To
separate them from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race
generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their
hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone. The effect of this separation on
their educational opportunities was well stated by a finding in the Kansas case by a
court which nevertheless felt compelled to rule against the Negro plaintiffs:
"Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect
upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for
the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the
negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation
with the sanction of law, therefore, has a tendency to [retard] the educational and
mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they
would receive in a racial[ly] integrated school system.
Whatever may have been the extent of psychological knowledge at the time of Plessy v.
Ferguson, this finding is amply supported by modern authority. Any language in Plessy
v. Ferguson contrary to this finding is rejected.
We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of "separate but equal"
has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold
that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought
are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the
laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. This disposition makes unnecessary
any discussion whether such segregation also violates the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment.
Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this decision, and
because of the great variety of local conditions, the formulation of decrees in these
cases presents problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the consideration
of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question -- the
constitutionality of segregation in public education. We have now announced that such
segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we may have
the full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, the cases will be restored to the
docket, and the parties are requested to present further argument on Questions 4 and 5
previously propounded by the Court for the reargument this Term. The Attorney General
of the United States is again invited to participate. The Attorneys General of the states
8
requiring or permitting segregation in public education will also be permitted to appear
as amici curiae upon request to do so by September 15, 1954, and submission of briefs
by October 1, 1954.
It is so ordered.
Retrieved May 2015 from: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/347/483/case.html
9