Brown v. Board of Education - Research Paper Example

Brown v. Board of Education With the exception of but a few landmark Supreme Court decisions, the one represented by Brown v. Board of Education is one that has arguably had one of the most powerful impacts on the way that the United States society has integrated and given way to the current representation of culture that currently exists within the system. As a function of this landmark case, this brief analysis will attempt to detail and understand the key and fundamental aspects that ultimately led to the court’s decision as well as seeking to understand some of the reasons for why the practice took so painfully long to rectify after the conclusion of a Civil War which was fought on precisely the equality of people’s under the law and the right of self determination; something that segregation necessarily and holistically implies. With regards to the first portion of the research which will be engaged with for this analysis, the reader can and should understand the judgment handed down by the Supreme Court as only overshadowed by such previous cases as Plessey v. Ferguson and the inclusion of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The sheer importance of the case cannot and should not be overlooked due to the fact that more than redefining the way in which the states and their representative private business participants integrated with the law, the ruling served to fundamentally shift the culture of the nation and kick started the Civil Rights movement into overdrive. Though the Civil Rights movement cannot necessarily be said to have a determinant beginning or a determined end, the fact of the matter is that by the time of Brown v. Board of Education, many African Americans and other disenfranchised groups who had previously been segregated saw the opportunity that the Second World War provided them to both change their station and position within the culture. In this way, Brown v. Board of Education provided the spring board upon which the Civil Rights movement could gain momentum and achieve something of a critical audience which would help to achieve many of the goals that it engendered. One fundamental aspect of Brown v. Board of Education that the majority of individuals seem to forget is the fact that the ruling only had an effect on the 17 states that required racial segregation. Ultimately, a wide swath of the country, 16 states in all, had specific laws on the books that forbade segregation entirely. In such a way, half of the nation was divided on the topic with the other states either tacitly practicing it or attempting to move towards a more progressive stance on the issues. Ultimately, what Brown v. Board of Education got down to the root of was whether or not the prior legal doctrine of separate but equal stood up to the implied intent of the Fourteenth Amendment. As such, the choice that the justices had to make was ultimately whether the practice of segregation meant that a state was “denying a person the equal protection of the law”. However, whereas these aspects of Brown v. Board of education were important, one cannot underestimate the importance that the cultural interpretation of law had with relation to the way in which the ruling was ultimately received. As a function of a long-standing belief by many states and their respective electorate/shareholders that blacks and other minorities were somehow inherently inferior to whites, the level of acceptance that these individuals exhibited with regards to such a seemingly rash ruling was ultimate disdain, disgust, and a renewed vision to push back against what this group of shareholders saw as flagrant and detached federal activism to an issue they knew little about. This pervasive theme that the federal government could not comprehend the level of importance or the direness of the issues that this group of whites within pro-segregation states was a pervasive theme up until as well as far after the decision concerning Brown v. Board of Education was handed down by the Supreme Court. In this way, the 9-0 decision with regards to Brown v. Board of Education that segregation represented an illegal deprivation of rights to the citizen was something of a cultural shock. As such, it is understandable why then president Dwight D. Eisenhower sought to engage the National Guard as a means of ensuring that the process of integration took place with as little incident as possible.1 Another societal misconception that has been born out of the current understanding of Brown v. Board of Education is the belief that Dwight D. Eisenhower’s action was motivated by the inherent needs and truth of the side that pushed for integration rather than by presidential responsibility. The unfortunately fact is, from a thorough review of extant historical documentation that Eisenhower himself expressed reservations as to the fairness and ethical reasoning behind the Supreme Court’s decision. One of course does not have to look far to realize the profound way in which Brown v. Board of Education has impacted upon the current social, educational, governmental, legal, and ethical framework upon which the country currently operates. However, rather than enumerating upon these obvious manifestations to a great deal of depth, it is necessary for the reader/researcher to consider the means by which Brown v. Board of Education actually served to forcibly shift a culture that had previously been so intractable upon the subject of racial integration. Such a forcible action was of course painful for racial harmony and created a large degree of discord; however, when one considers many of the alternate means by which such an integration could have taken place, it is difficult to understand that any of these would have affected the change so the satisfaction of all shareholders.2 As such, Eisenhower’s approach, though not engaged with willingly, helped to rapidly transform a system mired in tradition and racism. The racial integration, or lack thereof, that existed within the United States pre Brown v. Board of Education was something of a farce. Due to a litany of Jim Crow laws and a society of whites that felt their rights had been disenfranchised as a function of the end of slavery and the outcomes of Reconstruction, the environment into which Brown v. Board of Education was born was hostile to say the very least. It is from an understanding of this level of hostility that the reader can come to comprehend why Brown v. Board of Education or a ruling similar to it did not take place prior to the time in which it did. Ultimately, a very large percentage of racist whites were vehemently against any form of encroachment that such a ruling would have engendered. As a means of keeping this segment of society happy, the shareholders within the court systems, legislators within both state and federal capitals, and even the president of the United States at any given time were unwilling to touch this issue. Even with Eisenhower’s unwilling protection of the integrated populations, the degree of push back within the nation was severe at the time and threatened to explode into outright civil unrest. As a function of understanding this level of revulsion to the idea combined with the fact that the Jim Crow lows that defined much of the anti-segregation South had become so thoroughly entrenched as part of the local culture, it is easy to recognize and understand why racial integration did not experience any form of success previously and only made nominal inroads into the society of that time.3 Perhaps most importantly of all, the level to which segregation was accepted and practiced within the educational system is perhaps the bigger issue up for discussion. It is without a doubt that the level to which both whites and blacks, the shareholders within the nation and within the realm of education, sought to ensure that segregation was itself a net success was greatly lacking. This can of course be seen by the inherent racism that had been projected throughout the public school system for long before integration. Such a legacy has meant that the degree to which integration ever had a chance of experiencing a level of overall success was subject to question from the start. Naturally, it is not the belief of this author that Brown v. Board of Education itself is anything short of a victory of the justice system and the equal representation of people’s under the law of the land. Rather, it is the belief of this author that the culture of the United States was deficient in a powerful way; so much so that it was necessary to integrate by force even after the Supreme Court, the highest law in the land, had made it painfully obvious that discrimination based upon race was inexcusable and did not represent equal protection under the law as had previously been inferred under Plessey vs. Fergusson. Ultimately, due to the fact that the case has lain the framework for a much more specific and actionable understanding of what the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment states as well as the level to which the case continues to have a profound and lasting impact on the cultural development and preconceived notions that many within society have with relation to the issues of race, education, and society, Brown v. Board of Education continues to be a polarizing and overwhelmingly important case. Similarly, it is understandable, though lamentable, why such a case of this societal and cultural heft did not make its way before the Supreme Court with a similar outcome long before. References Engl, Margaret, Steven B. Permuth, and Terri K. Wonder. 2004. "Brown v. Board of Education": A Beginning Lesson in Social Justice." International Journal Of Educational Reform 13, no. 1: 64-73. ERIC, EBSCOhost (accessed March 4, 2013). Kelly, Genevieve M. 2012. "A SHORT-LIVED BENCHMARK: HOW THE SUPREME COURT DEBILITATED BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION LONG BEFORE PARENTS INVOLVED." George Mason Law Review 19, no. 3: 813-843. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed March 4, 2013). Larson, Carlton F. W. 2011. "WHAT IF CHIEF JUSTICE FRED VINSON HAD NOT DIED OF A HEART ATTACK IN 1953?: IMPLICATIONS FOR BROWN AND BEYOND." Indiana Law Review 45, no. 1: 131-157. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed March 4, 2013). Read More