Briggs v. Elliott
| Citation | 72 S.Ct. 327,96 L.Ed. 392,342 U.S. 350 |
| Decision Date | 28 January 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. 273,273 |
| Parties | BRIGGS et al. v. ELLIOTT et al |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
Harold R. Boulware, Columbia, S.C., Spottswood W. Robinson, III, Richmond, Va., Robert L. Carter, Thurgood Marshall, New York City (Arthur D. Shores, Birmingham, Ala., A. T. Walden, Atlanta, Ga., of counsel), for appellants.
S. E. Rogers, Summerton, S.C., Robert McC. Figg, Jr., Charleston, S.C., for appellees.
Appellant Negro school children brought this action in the Federal District Court to enjoin appellee school officials from making any distinctions based upon race or color in providing educational facilities for School District No. 22, Clarendon County, South Carolina. As the basis for their complaint, appellants alleged that equal facilities are not provided for Negro pupils and that those constitutional and statutory provisions of South Carolina requiring separate schools 'for children of the white and colored races'1 are invalid under the Fourteenth Amend- ment. At the trial before a court of three judges, appellees conceded that the school facilities provided for Negro students 'are not substantially equal to those afforded in the District for white pupils.'
The District Court held, one judge dissenting, that the challenged constitutional and statutory provisions were not of themselves violative of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court below also found that the educational facilities afforded by appellees for Negro pupils are not equal to those provided for white children. The District Court did not issue an injunction abolishing racial distinctions as prayed by appellants, but did order appellees to proceed at once to furnish educational facilities for Negroes equal to those furnished white pupils. In its decree, entered June 21, 1951, the Distrct Court ordered that appellees report to that court within six months as to action taken by them to carry out the court's order. 98 F.Supp. 529.
Dissatisfied with the relief granted by the District Court, appellants brought a timely appeal directly to this Court under 28 U.S.C. (Supp. IV) § 1253, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1253. After the appeal was docketed but before its consideration by this Court, appellees filed in the court below their report as ordered.
The District Court has not given its views on this report, having entered an order stating that it will withhold further action thereon while the cause is pending in this Court on appeal. Prior to our consideration of the questions...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Board of Education
...of obtaining the court's views on a report filed by the defendants concerning the progress made in the equalization program. 342 U.S. 350, 72 S.Ct. 327, 96 L.Ed. 392. On remand, the District Court found that substantial equality had been achieved except for buildings and that the defendants......
-
Green v. Board of Elections of City of New York
...2 Three-judge courts were also convoked on that issue in Briggs v. Elliott, 98 F. Supp. 529 (E.D.S.C.1951), vacated, 342 U.S. 350, 72 S.Ct. 327, 96 L.Ed. 392 (1952), decision on remand, 103 F.Supp. 920 (1952), and Davis v. County School Board, 103 F.Supp. 337 (E.D.Va.1952), both of which we......
-
Brown v. Bd. of Educ. of Topeka
...of obtaining the court's views on a report filed by the defendants concerning the progress made in the equalization program. 342 U.S. 350, 72 S.Ct. 327, 96 L.Ed. 392. On remand, the District Court found that substantial equality had been achieved except for buildings and that the defendants......
-
Brunson v. Board of Tr. of Sch. D. No. 1 of Clarendon Co., SC
...races. A three-judge court was convened and relief was denied. Briggs v. Elliot, 98 F.Supp. 529 (D.S.C.1951), vacated, 342 U.S. 350, 72 S.Ct. 327, 96 L.Ed. 392 (1952), on remand, 103 F.Supp. 920 (D.S.C.1952). The Supreme Court reversed in Brown I, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S.Ct. 686, 98 L.Ed. 873 (1......
-
Third-Class Citizens: Unequal Protection Within United States Territories.
...implication of integration through forced association). (61.) Briggs v. Elliott, 98 F. Supp. 529, 537 (E.D.S.C. 1951), vacated, 342 U.S. 350 (62.) See, e.g., Lee v. Macon Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 267 F. Supp. 458, 469 n.16 (M.D. Ala. 1967) (referencing officials' cultural preservation arguments)......
-
Education Equity During COVID-19: Analyzing In-Person Priority Policies for Students with Disabilities.
...91 A.2d 137 (Del. 1952), aff'd sub nom Brown, 349 U.S. 294. (213.) Briggs v. Elliott, 98 F. Supp. 529, 530-31 (E.D.S.C. 1951), vacated, 342 U.S. 350 (1952); The Brown Found, for Educ. Equity, Excellence & Rsch., Recovering Untold Stories: An Enduring Legacy of the Brown v. Board of Educ......
-
The Scrivener Opinions That Made a Difference
...that roared: Desegregation in America Briggs v. Elliott, 98 F. Supp. 529, 538-48 (E.D.S.C. 1951) (Waring, J., dissenting), vacated, 342 U.S. 350 (1952). Briggs v. Elliott was brought by 46 minors and 20 adults who were residents of Clarendon County, alleging that they were discriminated aga......