WebCanada, 305 U.S. 337 ; Sipuel v. Oklahoma, 332 U.S. 631 ; Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629 ; McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 . (1950) McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents. Those who will come under his guidance and influence must be directly affected by the education he receives. . The decision in this case was made in conjunction with Sweatt v. Painter and later influenced the decision in Brown v. Board of Education.[1]. We conclude that the conditions under which this appellant is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws. 851, 94 L.Ed. 851, present different aspects of this general question: To what extent does the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limit the power of a state to distinguish between students of different races in professional and graduate education in a state university? Robert L. Carter and Amos T. Hall argued the cause for appellant. McLaurin filed suit in federal court in Oklahoma City. Possessing a Master's degree, he applied for admission to the University of Oklahoma in order to pursue studies and courses leading to a Doctorate in Education. p\!Y.Ebt9/ z ^tGG"w N8f,SYU*Vn/ Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337 (1938), and Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 332 U.S. 631 (1948), a statutory three-judge District Court held that the State had a Constitutional duty to provide him with the education he sought as soon as it provided that education for applicants of any other group. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents is a case that was decided on June 5, 1950, by the United States Supreme Court holding that a state cannot treat a student differently on the basis of race. 1149), the Court, in requiring that a Negro admitted to a white graduate school be treated like all other students, again resorted to intangible considerations: his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession. The justices agreed unanimously that since McLaurin was admitted into the University of Oklahoma, denying him access to his peers through segregation was denying him an opportunity to "study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." (1950) 455, 456, 457. The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture, Oklahoma Heritage Preservation Grant Program. The experience needed for a good education could not be accomplished by physically separating McLaurin from his peers, and it disallowed him from working on many types of projects that involved one or more students, as well as participating in a discussion of any kind. 0000005065 00000 n A three-judge federal trial court determined that officials in Oklahoma had a constitutional duty to provide the plaintiff with the education he wanted as soon as they offered the same to students of any other race. - Discoveries, Timeline & Facts, Presidential Election of 1848: Summary, Candidates & Results, Lord Charles Cornwallis: Facts, Biography & Quotes, Charles Maurice de Talleyrand: Quotes & Biography, Who is Jose de San Martin? Mr. Fred Hansen, Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellees. Stateimposed restrictions which produce such inequalities cannot be sustained. No part of this site may be construed as in the public domain. - 339 U.S. 637, 70 S. Ct. 851 (1950) Rule: Where conditions exist where a student of color is required to receive his To remove these conditions, appellant filed a motion to modify the order and judgment of the District Court. Omissions? Fred Hansen, First Assistant Attorney General of Oklahoma, argued the cause for appellees. Following this decision, the Oklahoma legislature amended these statutes to permit the admission of Negroes to institutions of higher learning attended by white students, in cases where such institutions offered courses not available in the Negro schools. 848. Supreme Court of the United States McLaurin v. Oklahoma R(/LS S!|9Md(Bz_&zKCq(x, 2*V)Aac!:! McLaurin v. Okla. State Regents for Higher Educ. | Case Brief for The Court held that it was unconstitutional under the "equal protection clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment to deny McLaurin an equal education to the one his white peers were receiving. 208, and Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 1948, 332 U.S. 631, 68 S.Ct. While McLaurin argued that the University of Oklahoma was violating the equal protection clause under the 14th Amendment, the university argued that they were not violating McLaurin's rights. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents [ 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. In this case, we are faced with the question whether a state may, after admitting a student to graduate instruction in its state university, afford him different treatment from other students solely because of his race. Oklahoma. On the assumption, however, that the State would follow the constitutional mandate, the court refused to grant the injunction, retaining jurisdiction of the cause with full power to issue any necessary and proper orders to secure McLaurin the equal protection of the laws. A Black individual was admitted to the graduate school at the University of Oklahoma to pursue a doctorate in education. 0000001037 00000 n 526. Chief Justice Frederick Vinson delivered the opinion of the court. Oklahoma Historical Society800 Nazih Zuhdi Drive, Oklahoma City, OK 73105 | 405-521-2491Site Index | Contact Us | Privacy | Press Room | Website Inquiries, Get Updates in Your Inbox Keep up to date with our weekly newsletter delivered straight to your inbox. The result was that he was handicapped in his pursuit of effective graduate instruction. 526; 1948 U.S. 455. Appellant, a Negro citizen of Oklahoma possessing a masters degree, was admitted to the Graduate School of the state-supported University of Oklahoma as a candidate for a doctorate in education and was permitted to use the same classroom, library and cafeteria as white students. For some time, the section of the classroom in which appellant sat was surrounded by a rail on which there was a sign stating, 'Reserved For Colored,' but these have been removed. See Sweatt v. Painter, ante, p. 629. 0000067670 00000 n Those who will come under his guidance and influence must be directly affected by the education he receives. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents For Higher Education 1149 *637 **852 Al. Although the court declared that the statute allowing officials to deny the student admission to the program was null and void, it refused to grant his request for an injunction, assuming that officials would follow the constitutional mandate in its order. WebMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. Pp. Use this button to switch between dark and light mode. The sign that hung around the students sites in the classroom stating Reserved for Colored was removed, and he was assigned to a table on the main floor of the library; his previous table was on the mezzanine level. 247, a statutory three-judge District Court held, 87 F.Supp. 526 (W.D. Marian W. Perry and Franklin H. Williams were also of counsel. HW1C~NR In addition, the court ruled that, insofar as the restrictions that officials imposed on the student impaired and inhibited his ability to study and to engage in discussions and debates with other students as well as faculty, this treatment had a detrimental impact on his overall educational experience. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950) was a case regarding higher education that was decided by the United States Supreme Court saying that colleges and universities could not segregate students under the Fourteenth Amendment. In the McLaurin case, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the University of Oklahoma had violated the equal protection clause because the experience needed for a good education could not be accomplished by physically separating McLaurin. We decide only this issue; see Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629, 70 S.Ct. WebIn 1948, George McLaurin applied to the University of Oklahoma's master's degree program in education. WebG.W. His application was rejected because state law prohibited black Dist. Pp. In apparent conformity with the amendment, his admission was made subject to such rules and regulations as to segregation as the President of the University shall consider to afford to Mr. G. W. McLaurin substantially equal educational opportunities as are afforded to other persons seeking the same education in the Graduate College, a condition which does not appear to have been withdrawn. In this case, we are faced with the question whether a state may, after admitting a student to graduate instruction in its state university, afford him different treatment from other students solely because of his race. Okla. 1948) U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma - 87 F. Supp. 34. African American History: Research Guides & Websites, Global African History: Research Guides & Websites, African American Scientists and Technicians of the Manhattan Project, Envoys, Diplomatic Ministers, & Ambassadors, Foundation, Organization, and Corporate Supporters. All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. 339 U. S. 640-641. His opinion for the court in 1947 upheld the power of the federal courts to enjoin a strike in coal mines then under control of the federal government. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra [ 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. The studentfiled a complaint requesting injunctive relief, alleging that the action of the school authorities and the statutes upon which their action was based were unconstitutional and deprived himof the equal protection of the laws. This we think irrelevant. Corrections? 0000001099 00000 n v WebThe school districts appealed, claiming that the federal courts did not have jurisdiction over education, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately upheld McCormicks decision on April 14, 1947, ruling that the schools actions violated California law. U.S. Supreme Court Cases: Study Guide & Review, Johnson v. Eisentrager: Case Brief & Summary, Psychological Research & Experimental Design, All Teacher Certification Test Prep Courses, Ruling of McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents. George W. McLaurin(2012.201.B0391.0687, Oklahoma Publishing Company Photography Collection, OHS). In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. The result is that appellant is handicapped in his pursuit of effective graduate instruction. 0000071254 00000 n To read more about the impact of McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents click here. 455. These restrictions were obviously imposed in order to comply, as nearly as could be, with the statutory requirements of Oklahoma. Reversing, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a state could not treat a student differently from other students on the basis of race as theFourteenth Amendmentprecludes such differences in treatment. Terms of Use About the Encyclopedia. Appellant [339 U.S. 637, 640] was thereupon admitted to the University of Oklahoma Graduate School. But at the very least, the state will not be depriving appellant of the opportunity [339 U.S. 637, 642] to secure acceptance by his fellow students on his own merits. On January 28, 1948, a retired black professor, George McLaurin, applied to the University of Oklahoma to pursue a Doctorate in Education. But at the very least, the state will not be depriving appellant of the opportunity to secure acceptance by his fellow students on his own merits. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. U.S. Supreme CourtMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950), McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. United States District Court W. D. It is said that the separations imposed by the State in this case are in form merely nominal. McLaurin appealed to the United States Supreme Court on the basis that he was being denied equal protection under the 14th Amendment. Sweatt v. Painter P. 339 U. S. 642. Create your account. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents | Case Brief, Summary Appellant, having been admitted to a state-supported graduate school, must receive the same treatment at the hands of the state as students of other races. 1149 McLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE The court did not believe that it was Constitutional to integrate different races and social classes. Appellant's case represents, perhaps, the epitome of that need, for he is attempting to obtain an advanced degree in education, to become, by definition, a leader and trainer of others. 851, 94 L.Ed. D G zmS& endstream endobj 28 0 obj<>stream 638-642. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, https://www.britannica.com/event/McLaurin-v-Oklahoma-State-Regents, BlackPast - McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, Cornell Law School - Legal Information Institute - McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. The result is that appellant is handicapped in his pursuit of effective graduate instruction. Thus he was required to sit apart at a designated desk in an anteroom adjoining the classroom; to sit at a designated desk on the mezzanine floor of the library, but not to use the desks in the regular reading room; and to sit at a designated table and to eat at a different time from the other students in the school cafeteria. These restrictions were obviously imposed in order to comply, as nearly as could be, with the statutory requirements of Oklahoma. P. 642. 0000002024 00000 n 0000062723 00000 n WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents 2,513 views Jul 7, 2016 29 Dislike Share Save OU IACH 2.33K subscribers In this lecture, professor Kathryn Schumaker reviews the Language links are at the top of the page across from the title. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education The proceedings below are stated in the opinion. McLaurin uses the same classroom, library and cafeteria as students of other races; there is no indication that the seats to which he is assigned in these rooms have any disadvantage [339 U.S. 637, 641] of location. The Act secured the right to vote for minorities in the South. - Biography, Facts, Quotes & Accomplishments, Working Scholars Bringing Tuition-Free College to the Community. 20 0 obj <> endobj xref 20 27 0000000016 00000 n McLaurin (plaintiff) was a Black citizen of Oklahoma. 851 [ 94 L.Ed. This page was last edited on 18 March 2023, at 15:55. Such restrictions impair and inhibit his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession. 455. The Supreme Court also held that officials at the University of Oklahoma had violated the plaintiffs right to equal protection of the laws by denying him an education that was equal to that of his peers. 0000001634 00000 n (c) Having been admitted to a state supported graduate school, appellant must receive the same treatment at the hands of the State as students of other races. George McLaurin, Educator born The court thus concluded that the Fourteenth Amendment precluded the enforcement of the Oklahoma statute that required African American students to be treated differently from other students. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337, 59 S.Ct. A small donation would help us keep this available to all. WebPainter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents [both 1950]). v McLaurin then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. 87 F.Supp. Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. In 2001, the Bizzell Memorial Library, the main library at the University of Oklahoma, was designated a U.S. National Historic Landmark in commemoration of this case. McLaurin won the right to attend the University of Oklahoma; however, Oklahoma simply amended its laws to say that while African Americans could attend white institutions, they must be segregated. In this case, the Court found that the State of Oklahoma had set the plaintiff student apart from the other students. This appeal followed. 0000003722 00000 n Susan Cianci Salvatore (September 1, 2001), U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, Post Office, Courthouse, and Federal Office Building, NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, Sipuel v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, List of landmark African-American legislation, List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 339, public domain material from this U.S government document, National Historic Landmark Nomination: Bizzell Library, University of Oklahoma, Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms, Cooperative Institute for Mesoscale Meteorological Studies, Julian P. Kanter Political Commercial Archive, Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Communication, College of Atmospheric and Geographic Sciences, Weitzenhoffer Family College of Fine Arts. 0000000836 00000 n As a result of the amended Oklahoma law, the plaintiff was assigned to sit in a row of classroom seats reserved for African American students, had to sit at an assigned table in the library, and, while he was allowed to eat in the cafeteria, he had a designated table. Since McLauren did not have access to this aspect of his education, he was being denied an equal education to that of his peers. Appellant filed a complaint requesting injunctive relief, alleging that the action of the school authorities and the statutes upon which their action was based were unconstitutional and deprived him of the equal protection of the laws. Name Meaning Pitts Linda Joan 1 English: variant of Pitt .2 Americanized spelling of German Pitz . Their own education and development will necessarily suffer to the extent that his training is unequal to that of his classmates. US Supreme Court Opinions and Cases | FindLaw Possessing a Masters Degree, he applied for admission to the University of Oklahoma in order to pursue studies and courses leading to a Doctorate in Education. 851, 94 L.Ed. BlackPast.org is a 501(c)(3) non-profit and our EIN is 26-1625373. The removal of the state restrictions will not necessarily abate individual and group predilections, prejudices and choices. Citing our decisions in Missouri ex rel. State-imposed restrictions which produce such inequalities cannot be sustained. Read More opinion of Vinson In Fred M. Vinson to white persons only ( Shelley v. Kraemer, 1948). The result is that appellant is handicapped in his pursuit of effective graduate instruction. Civ. George W. McLaurin Where conditions exist where a student of color is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws such circumstances theFourteenth Amendmentprecludes differences in treatment by the state based upon race. Dist.) of City of Benton Harbor. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 640, 70 S.Ct. Get free summaries of new US Supreme Court opinions delivered to your inbox! As a result, much of the South adopted "separate but equal" policies that governed daily life. But they signify that the State, in administering the facilities it affords for professional and graduate study, sets McLaurin apart from the other students. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 87 F. Supp. The proceedings below are stated in the opinion. US Supreme Court. Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc. Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York, Will v. Michigan Department of State Police, Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community, Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee. [ Footnote 1 ] The amendment adds the following proviso to each of the sections relating to mixed schools: Provided, that the provisions of this Section shall not apply to programs of instruction leading to a particular degree given at State owned or operated colleges or institutions of higher education of this State established for and/or used by the white race, where such programs of instruction leading to a particular degree are not given at colleges or institutions of higher education of this State established for and/or used by the colored race; provided further, that said programs of instruction leading to a particular degree shall be given at such colleges or institutions of higher education upon a segregated basis. 70 Okla. Stat. Upon suit filed by the applicant, the university tried to set up a separate facility for African-American law students. On the assumption, however, that the State would follow the constitutional mandate, the court refused to grant the injunction, retaining jurisdiction of the cause with full power to issue any necessary and proper orders to secure McLaurin the equal protection of the laws. Out of this came the "separate but equal" policies of the post-Reconstruction South. Briefs of amici curiae, supporting appellant, were filed by Solicitor General Perlman and Philip Elman for the United States; Paul G. Annes for the American Federation of Teachers; Phineas Indritz for the American Veterans Committee, Inc.; Arthur J. Goldberg for the Congress of Industrial Organizations; Edward J. Ennis and Saburo Kido for the Japanese American Citizens League; and Arthur Garfield Hays and Eugene Nickerson for the American Civil Liberties Union.