McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Ed.

Citation87 F. Supp. 526
Decision Date06 October 1948
Docket NumberCiv. No. 4039.
PartiesMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma

Amos T. Hall, Tulsa, Okl., and Thurgood Marshall, New York City, attorneys for plaintiff.

Mac Q. Williamson, Attorney General, State of Oklahoma, Fred Hansen and George T. Montgomery, Assistants to the Attorney General, attorneys for defendants.

Before MURRAH, Circuit Judge, VAUGHT, Chief Judge, and BROADDUS, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

By this suit, we were asked to enjoin the defendants from refusing to admit the plaintiff to the University of Oklahoma, for the purpose of pursuing a postgraduate course in education leading toward a doctor's degree. It is said that although having made timely application for admission, and being morally and scholastically qualified, he has been denied admission solely because, as a member of the Negro Race, the laws of Oklahoma forbid his admission under criminal penalty. It is said that in these circumstances, refusal to admit the plaintiff to the University of Oklahoma, for the purpose of pursuing the course of study he seeks, is a deprivation of his rights to the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Findings of Fact.

I. In accordance with the stipulation, the court finds that the University of Oklahoma is an educational institution maintained by the taxpayers of the State, from funds derived from uniform taxation, and that it is the only educational institution supported by public taxation in which the plaintiff can pursue a postgraduate course leading to a doctor's degree in education.

II. That during the enrollment period for the second semester for the 1947-1948 school term, plaintiff applied for admission to the University for the purpose of taking such courses which would entitle him to a doctor's degree in education, and that at the time of his application, he possessed and still possesses all of the scholastic and moral qualifications prescribed by the University of Oklahoma for admission to the courses he seeks to pursue, and that he was denied admission to the University on February 2, 1948, solely because as a member of the Negro Race, the applicable laws of Oklahoma, 70 O.S.1941 §§ 455, 456 and 457, make it a criminal offense for any person to operate a school or college or any educational institution where persons of both white and colored races are received as pupils for instruction, or for any instructors to teach in, or any white person to attend, any such school.

Conclusions of Law.

I. This suit arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and seeks redress for the deprivation of civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The court is therefore vested with jurisdiction, regardless of diversity of citizenship or amount in controversy. Hague v. C. I. O., 307 U.S. 496, 514, 59 S.Ct. 954, 83 L.Ed. 1423; Douglas v. City of Jeannette, 319 U.S. 157, 63 S.Ct. 877, 87 L.Ed. 1324. Since a temporary injunction against the enforcement of the State laws...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • State ex rel. Hawkins v. Board of Control of Fla.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • August 1, 1950
    ...Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 332 U.S. 631, 68 S.Ct. 299, 92 L.Ed. 247, rev'g. 199 Okl. 36, 180 P.2d 135; and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Ed., D.C., 87 F.Supp. 526. The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States from which we have quoted is binding upon this court in......
  • McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Ed.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma
    • November 22, 1949
    ...defendant. Before VAUGHT, Chief Judge, MURRAH, Circuit Judge and BROADDUS, District Judge. PER CURIAM. At a former hearing of this cause, 87 F.Supp. 526, we held the segregation laws of the State of Oklahoma, 70 O.S. 1941 §§ 455, 456 and 457, unconstitutional and inoperative insofar as they......
  • Laurin v. Oklahoma State Regents For Higher Education
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 5, 1950
    ...L.Ed. 208, and Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 1948, 332 U.S. 631, 68 S.Ct. 299, 92 L.Ed. 247, a statutory three-judge District Court held, 87 F.Supp. 526, that the State had a constitutional duty to provide him with the education he sought as soon as it provided that education for applicants o......
  • Stella v. Kaiser
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • June 10, 1949

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT