Today in Supreme Court History: May 17, 1954

5/17/1954: Brown v. Board of Education and Bolling v. Sharpe are decided.

 

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Would be decided differently today, of course.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Brown I would be the same. I could see a fractured decision on Bolling v. Sharpe. Brown II would be different. This Court would not accept a remedy of forced integration because you would have to take race into account to achieve the ends. They would likely declare raced based classifications as unconstitutional, but then end it there, whether de facto segregation persists would not be their problem.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Rehnquist (at the time Jackson's law clerk) urged affirmance of Plessy. I assume he would do so today, if he were not bound by the Brown precedent. The current court is mostly to the right of Rehnquist. That's why I say Brown would be decided differently today.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Right. But the current court is extremely wedded to the idea of the colorblind constitution. So they would likely strike any statute or policy that explicitly discriminated based on race, but then would turn around and say the courts can’t do anything beyond that about segregation because that is taking people’s race into account.

[Dan Schiavetta]

But there was no discrimination here. Black students were not excluded from school. Indeed, white students couldn't go to the black schools, as well as black students not being able to go to white schools.

[LawTalkingGuy]

But it was written into the law as a race based classification. That’s what they hate.

[Dilan Esper]

Times are different, and "conservative" in one era doesn't mean "conservative" in another era. Rehnquist would not have decided Miranda, but he authored Dickerson.

[DaivdBehar]

From Reconstruction, to the darkest days of genocidal lawyer jihad of Jim Crow against black people, the disparity in social pathologies was always small. They had 1% more unemployment, 10% more crime. Like that. They lived in intact patriarchal families, were Christians, loved America, despite their horrible treatment by the lawyer genocidal maniac. Many were prosperous and thrived providing services and products to black communities.

Starting with this lawless decision, the feminist lawyer destroyed the black family. The disparity in social pathologies shot up to 400%. The excess murder rate is 4000 a year. It took the lawyer founded and run organization, the KKK, 100 years to lynch 4000 blacks. Now the excess murder rate in lawyer controlled Democrat jurisidictions is 100 times more deadly to black males than the KKK.

Why blacks vote for their mortal enemy, the lawyer controlled Democrat Party, requires an explanation.

[SMP0328]

You think Brown v. Board of Education was "lawless"? What about Plessy v. Ferguson? To me, Brown was SCOTUS's way of starting to clean up the catastrophic mistake it made in Plessy.

[Krychek_2]

You're missing the point. To Daivd, there is no such thing as a problem that isn't the fault of the lawyers. You name any social problem whatsoever and I'll bet you a week's pay Daivd will find some way that it's the lawyers' fault.

[DaivdBehar]

Krychek is correct. Name any social pathology, it is 100% the fault of the lawyer profession. That makes them 10 times more toxic than organized crime.

[Krychek_2]

So, since you are a social pathology, that means you, too, are the fault of the lawyer profession? Were your parents lawyers by chance?

[DaivdBehar]

You are quite correct. I am not a lawyer, but had some legal training. I am a walking social pathology, annoying and worthless.

[DaivdBehar]

Plessy showed the lawyer on the Supreme Court cannot read elementary school English, and make shit up to impose their sick biases and beliefs. Persons and equal are third grade vocabulary words. Discrimination can be remedied by the market. They imposed discrimination at the point of a gun. I could not open a hotel with a sign, all races welcome, in a Southern state with a one third black population. A catastrophe 100% the fault of the lawyer.