Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)16:51:28 | 10 comments | 2 images
In Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (1938) the Supreme Court ruled that the University of Missouri's law school could not refuse black students on the grounds that there was no comparable black law school in the state. The case involved a black man named Lloyd Gaines who attempted to enroll in the university's law school but could not as it was whites-only and Missouri had enforced racial segregation around education. Gaines had previous attended the black Lincoln University from which he graduated in 1935 with a BA in fine arts but Lincoln had no law school. Four of the seven states bordering Missouri had racially integrated universities and Gaines was offered the possibility of enrolling in any of them with the state paying his tuition but with the assistance of the NAACP he instead filed suit on 14th Amendment grounds.
The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Gaines's equal protection rights were violated. Chief Justice Hughes wrote the majority opinion for the case. Missouri racially segregated its schools like most of the former slave states, but unique among them it opened a black university (Lincoln) that was ostensibly to provide blacks with an education on equal footing to white students. Hughes added that "separate but equal" segregation had been upheld by the Court since Plessy v. Ferguson 42 years earlier. Nonetheless, it was indisputable that no law school was available to blacks in the state. The state had made a declaration of intent to establish a law school at Lincoln, but it was just a declaration and nothing more. In addition, this declaration was made back in 1921, seventeen years earlier, and no attempt at actually starting the proposed law school had been made in that time.
The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Gaines's equal protection rights were violated. Chief Justice Hughes wrote the majority opinion for the case. Missouri racially segregated its schools like most of the former slave states, but unique among them it opened a black university (Lincoln) that was ostensibly to provide blacks with an education on equal footing to white students. Hughes added that "separate but equal" segregation had been upheld by the Court since Plessy v. Ferguson 42 years earlier. Nonetheless, it was indisputable that no law school was available to blacks in the state. The state had made a declaration of intent to establish a law school at Lincoln, but it was just a declaration and nothing more. In addition, this declaration was made back in 1921, seventeen years earlier, and no attempt at actually starting the proposed law school had been made in that time.
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)16:52:31 No.17450820
The state countered that any of the law schools at the universities of Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, and Kansas were of "excellent" quality and would furnish Mr. Gaines with as good of an education as he could receive at the University of Missouri and had very similar and largely standardized curricula; further UM did not actually specialize in Missouri state law, nor would the travel distance to any of them be overly long or burdensome.
Hughes did not accept this explanation. He argued that it was indisputable that Missouri had violated Gaines's 14th Amendment rights by denying him access to UM's law school and forcing him to travel out of state to attend one. The Chief Justice also dismissed the state's claim that the amount of black law students in the state was small enough to not justify the need of a separate black law school at Lincoln. He cited McCabe v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co. (1914) when the Court had rejected a claim that racially segregated luxury railroad cars in Oklahoma were justified on the grounds that the amount of blacks in the state who could afford to travel on them was negligible.
Hughes did not accept this explanation. He argued that it was indisputable that Missouri had violated Gaines's 14th Amendment rights by denying him access to UM's law school and forcing him to travel out of state to attend one. The Chief Justice also dismissed the state's claim that the amount of black law students in the state was small enough to not justify the need of a separate black law school at Lincoln. He cited McCabe v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co. (1914) when the Court had rejected a claim that racially segregated luxury railroad cars in Oklahoma were justified on the grounds that the amount of blacks in the state who could afford to travel on them was negligible.
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)16:53:47 No.17450822
Justice McReynolds dissented--a Southerner by birth, he habitually opposed civil rights during his years on the Court. He argued that the states had the right to regulate all of their educational institutions as they saw fit and the Constitution did not grant the Federal government any authority to interfere with them. Citing Gong Lum v. Rice (1927) McReynolds quoted Chief Justice Taft's opinion that the states had the right to regulate their schools. "For a long time, Missouri has acted upon the view that the best interest of her people demands separation of whites and negroes in schools. Under the opinion just announced, I presume she may abandon her law school, and thereby disadvantage her white citizens without improving petitioner's opportunities for legal instruction; or she may break down the settled practice concerning separate schools and thereby, as indicated by experience, damnify both races. Whether by some other course it may be possible for her to avoid condemnation is matter for conjecture."
McReynolds went on to say that it was not unreasonable for Lloyd Gaines to travel to another state to attend law school and that no black student had ever tried to enroll at UM's law school prior to him.
McReynolds went on to say that it was not unreasonable for Lloyd Gaines to travel to another state to attend law school and that no black student had ever tried to enroll at UM's law school prior to him.
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)16:55:19 No.17450824
Lloyd Gaines won his case but he never got to actually attend the University of Missouri--during the suit, he was commuting between Missouri and Illinois looking for work in between making speeches at local NAACP chapters. On March 19, 1939, he left a frat house in Chicago to run an errand when he disappeared and was never seen or heard from again. It is not known what became of him; many believed he was abducted and murdered by white supremacists, but others thought he tired of his newfound celebrity and moved elsewhere under an assumed name to begin a new life. No serious attempt by any law enforcement agencies at locating Gaines was made and a memo written by J. Edgar Hoover in 1940 remarked that the case was "not within the FBI's jurisdiction."
Justice Thurgood Marshall would remember that the Gaines case was "one of our great legal victories" but "it was painful to have him vanish after all that time and money spent winning the case."
Justice Thurgood Marshall would remember that the Gaines case was "one of our great legal victories" but "it was painful to have him vanish after all that time and money spent winning the case."
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)16:57:37 No.17450830
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)17:13:02 No.17450856
>>17450822
>For a long time, Missouri has acted upon the view that the best interest of her people demands separation of whites and negroes in schools. Under the opinion just announced, I presume she may abandon her law school, and thereby disadvantage her white citizens without improving petitioner's opportunities for legal instruction; or she may break down the settled practice concerning separate schools and thereby, as indicated by experience, damnify both races
absolutely based
>For a long time, Missouri has acted upon the view that the best interest of her people demands separation of whites and negroes in schools. Under the opinion just announced, I presume she may abandon her law school, and thereby disadvantage her white citizens without improving petitioner's opportunities for legal instruction; or she may break down the settled practice concerning separate schools and thereby, as indicated by experience, damnify both races
absolutely based
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)17:22:54 No.17450876
>McReynolds went on tirades about "un-Americans" and "political subversives."[5] Known as a blatant bigot,[14][D][33] he would not accept "Jews, drinkers, blacks, women, smokers, married or engaged individuals" as law clerks.[34] Time "called him 'Puritanical', 'intolerably rude', 'savagely sarcastic', 'incredibly reactionary', and 'anti-Semitic'".[35][36][37] McReynolds refused to speak to Louis Brandeis, the first Jewish member of the Court, for the first three years of Brandeis's tenure. When Brandeis retired in 1939, McReynolds again did not sign the dedicatory letter.[36][38] He habitually left the conference room whenever Brandeis spoke.[36]
based based BASED
>When Benjamin Cardozo's appointment was being pressed on President Herbert C. Hoover, McReynolds joined Justices Pierce Butler and Willis Van Devanter in urging the White House not to "afflict the Court with another Jew".[39] When news of Cardozo's appointment was announced, McReynolds is claimed to have said "Huh, it seems that the only way you can get on the Supreme Court these days is to be either the son of a criminal or a Jew, or both."[40][41] During Cardozo's swearing-in ceremony, McReynolds pointedly read a newspaper.[40][42] He often held a brief or record in front of his face when Cardozo delivered an opinion from the bench.[43] Likewise, he refused to sign opinions authored by Brandeis.[3]
absolutely B&R
based based BASED
>When Benjamin Cardozo's appointment was being pressed on President Herbert C. Hoover, McReynolds joined Justices Pierce Butler and Willis Van Devanter in urging the White House not to "afflict the Court with another Jew".[39] When news of Cardozo's appointment was announced, McReynolds is claimed to have said "Huh, it seems that the only way you can get on the Supreme Court these days is to be either the son of a criminal or a Jew, or both."[40][41] During Cardozo's swearing-in ceremony, McReynolds pointedly read a newspaper.[40][42] He often held a brief or record in front of his face when Cardozo delivered an opinion from the bench.[43] Likewise, he refused to sign opinions authored by Brandeis.[3]
absolutely B&R
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)19:56:29 No.17451209
>>17450824
>The first African-American Supreme Court Justice would not be remembered for much outside breaking the color barrier. Marshall authored few opinions in his quarter century on the Court and none on any major cases. He was not a great intellectual force, but he was a liberal vote and a reliable one. Marshall's closest ally on the Court was Justice William Brennan, although Brennan was a greater intellect. The two usually voted in lockstep and by the 1980s their votes were the same about 95% of the time--Brennan's retirement in 1991 may have been what convinced Marshall to step down even though he'd hoped to stay on the bench until a Democrat occupied the White House. Marshall became increasingly jaded and disinterested as the Court came to be filled with Republican appointees over the years, leaving much of his work to clerks. His often derisive remarks about Republican presidents didn't win him a lot of friends. Some of Marshall's public statements also bordered on the bizarre, such as one time he told a reporter "If it’s a dope case, I won’t even read the petition. I ain’t giving no break to no drug dealer."
>The first African-American Supreme Court Justice would not be remembered for much outside breaking the color barrier. Marshall authored few opinions in his quarter century on the Court and none on any major cases. He was not a great intellectual force, but he was a liberal vote and a reliable one. Marshall's closest ally on the Court was Justice William Brennan, although Brennan was a greater intellect. The two usually voted in lockstep and by the 1980s their votes were the same about 95% of the time--Brennan's retirement in 1991 may have been what convinced Marshall to step down even though he'd hoped to stay on the bench until a Democrat occupied the White House. Marshall became increasingly jaded and disinterested as the Court came to be filled with Republican appointees over the years, leaving much of his work to clerks. His often derisive remarks about Republican presidents didn't win him a lot of friends. Some of Marshall's public statements also bordered on the bizarre, such as one time he told a reporter "If it’s a dope case, I won’t even read the petition. I ain’t giving no break to no drug dealer."
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)19:59:01 No.17451216
>>17450830
Access to white people IS a human right
Access to white people IS a human right
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)20:38:09 No.17451321
>Because Marshall voted in lockstep with Brennan so much, the pair were jokingly referred to as Mr. Justice Marshall-Brennan. The 4/21/89 National Review showed on its cover a cartoon of Marshall sleeping on the bench. Justice Powell reportedly claimed once that Marshall did not remember the details of his own dissent in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez. In "The Brethren", authors Robert Woodward and Scott Armstrong depicted the justice as "off in space" during oral arguments, did not do his work, had his clerks do a lot of work for him, often watched TV in the middle of the day, and was notorious for cracking dirty jokes during obscenity cases. Chief Justice Rehnquist once commented of his colleague "I think he will be remembered as a great legal activist, but not as any kind of a great legal thinker."
Anonymous 01/22/25(Wed)20:52:10 No.17451369
>>17451321
tl;dr he was a nig
tl;dr he was a nig