| |
SPEECHES
Stephen Breyer Associate Justice Supreme Court of the United States
50th Anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education
Topeka, Kansas May 17, 2004
Fifty years ago today the Supreme Court of the United States decided Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. Here is the question that case 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?" The Court answered this question unanimously: "We believe that it does."
As a member of the Supreme Court, I am here today to represent that Court, not nine individual Justices, but the institution itself - an institution as old as the Republic, charged with the responsibility of interpreting the Constitution of the United States.
May 17, 1954, was a great day - many would say the greatest day - in the history of that institution.
Before May 17, 1954, the Court read the Constitution's words "equal protection of the laws," as if they protected only the members of the majority race. After May 17, 1954, it read those words as the post-Civil War Framers meant them, as offering the same protection to citizens of every race.
Before May 17, 1954, the words "equal justice under law," chiseled in stone above the Supreme Court's door, rang with irony. After May 17, 1954, those words began to mean what they say.
Before May 17, 1954, the Court was not a Court for all the people. After May 17, 1954, the Court began to enforce a law that strives to treat every citizen with equal respect.
A great lawyer, Thurgood Marshall, who later became a member of the Supreme Court, represented the schoolchildren in Brown. He argued that separating our children by race violates the Constitution's promise of equal protection. The Court agreed, embracing Marshall's argument with a simple affirmation: "We believe that it does."
And what great effect those few words have had.
With those words, the Court told the Nation clearly and unequivocally that segregation based on race is wrong and that the law cannot tolerate that wrong.
With those words, the Court said to parents from Topeka, from South Carolina, from Virginia, from Delaware, from the District of Columbia, and to parents everywhere, that "education is perhaps the most important function of State and local governments," thereby setting the Nation on a path towards a goal of quality education for all children, a goal not yet achieved.
With those words, the Court forced the Nation to ask itself whether it believed in a rule of law - a rule of law that the Nation's history had sometimes denied, a rule of law that President Eisenhower enforced in 1957 when he sent federal paratroopers to Arkansas to take those black schoolchildren by the hand and walk them safely through that white schoolhouse door. We now accept that rule of law as part of our heritage, thanks to Brown and to its aftermath. But too often we take that rule of law for granted, without recollecting the conditions of fifty years ago and without adequate appreciation for those whose struggles made it possible.
Above all, Brown's simple affirmation helped us all to understand that our Constitution was meant to create not a democracy just written on paper but a democracy that works in practice and which cannot work in practice unless every citizen understands that the Constitution belongs, not to the "majority," or to the lawyers, or to the judges, but to each of us. Brown helped us to understand that the Constitution is "ours," whoever we may be.
In this way that simple affirmation expresses the belief that many millions of Americans of different races, different religions and different points of view can come together each day to create one single nation. That is the hope that Thurgood Marshall expressed in his argument to the Court in Brown. It is a hope about the Constitution - one Constitution; a hope about the people - one people; a hope about the Nation - one Nation. That is the message that the Court sent forth in Brown on that day fifty years ago, a day when the Court responded to a call for justice, a day, which for that reason we rightly celebrate, here, today, in Topeka, Kansas.
Court
Court
Court
Court
Court
Court
Court
- Law firm web site
Please read the: Conditions of this Web site
Find information on matters related to : legalconditions legal conditions famous Laarchi search: lawyer Beersheva intellectual property lawyers person law firm lawyer lawyers good lawyers and Notary lawyer patents licensed attorney in Jerusalem lawyer lawyers Eilat Bar Association SPEECHES conference sentences fact factual notary criminal negligence Attorneys lawyers Ashdod Internet copyright lawyer Hasatelmaota lawyers attorney begins a lawyer expert lawyers in the northern
commercial lawyer list LAW FIRMS lawyers Netanya several lawyers Finding a lawyer to be a lawyer lawyers expert pool of lawyers election bureau editors Din lawyer Tel Aviv Israel Bar Association lawyers Israel lawyers site names of lawyers and attorneys patent attorney insurance lawyers insurance lawyer implementation lawyer of road accidents lawyer Jerusalem lawyers Family Law Conditions gurfh shi wage lawyer lawyers Beer Sheva work lawyer Legal service lawyers leading lawyers and attorneys Job Network lawyers detection lawyers and attorneys Eataboura criminal lawyer in Tel gu "s Aviv lawyer Attorney family attorneys Real estate attorneys work network gurl shi guide lawyers notary Lawyer medical negligence lawyers in Tel Aviv to Haifa, a lawyer attorneys family attorney Adam immigration lawyers Hashmha lawyers attorney Real estate lawyers
Links criminal lawyer Haifa criminal lawyer in Court North Haese company attorneys book lawyers
Hashmat lawyers and attorneys negligence Medical lawyer injuries required a lawyer wage index lawyers attorney copyright attorneys Tel Aviv and attorneys' fees of lawyers and attorneys Law portal damages and attorneys fee lawyers Jerusalem lawyer in Tel Aviv lawyers real estate lawyers in Jerusalem Abe lawyer Search Editor Law attorney and real trial lawyers divorce law office Fortl lawyers and attorneys About us in Haifa rating lawyers attorney in the center of lawyers Flawyers in Jerusalem Abe lawyer Search Editor Law attorney and real trial lawyers divorce law office Fortl lawyers google and criminal lawyers Criminal law Haifa lawyers
traffic lawyer traffic lawyer laws work Forum lawyers and attorneys Chabad.org class members in Israel lawyers laws tongue Work ministries, the worst rating lawyers Search lawyers divorce lawyer needed a lawyer Jobs attorneys a list of lawyers in legal offices lawyers criminal lawyer law firm business Legal conditions licensing copyright court dismissal of birth Working Holiday Law Car accident underwriting Kabbalah agreement Ahuce"p
Cwaota inheritance Ruling class members damages articles insolvency cases the United שיקים banks exchange gossip suit Dybah order law shortened the amount of fixed breach of contract agreement Bar Association lawyers Ministry of road accidents Flawyers in Jerusalem Abe lawyer Русскоговорящие Адвокаты Search Editor Law attorney and real trial lawyers divorce law office Fortl lawyers google and
Web site
|
| |
עורכי דין O עורך דין O עורכי דין O מאמרי משפט
O עו"ד O לשון הרע O הוצאה לפועל O דיני אינטרנט O פלילי O תקנון O קבלה O בתי משפט O פסקי דין O
אינדקס עורכי דין O מבצעים O נזיקין O יפות.קום O הנחות O נזיקין O גירושין O נוטריון O רישוי עסקים
O פשיטת רגל O צוואה O זכויות יוצרים O תביעה ייצוגית
O משפחה O נדל"ן
O מקרקעין O תביעה ייצוגית
O בג"ץ O רשלנות O גביית חובות
O הוצל"פ O הסכם ממון O חוזים O תאונות דרכים O עבודה
O פיצויים O פיטורין O פורטל משפטי O תקשורת O דיני רשת O אישור תביעה ייצוגית O
זה טוב O משכנתא O משכנתאות
O תביעה ייצוגית O ביטוח O משחקים O רוחניות |