Although the Court made the right decision in the Brown v. Board ruling, supporters of the verdict did not anticipate the depth of fear from white people nor resentment toward the decision, underestimating the limitations the decision would have in a racist context, as well (Ladson-Billings, 2004, p. 5). In fact, students who attempted to integrate into a white public school faced very negative consequences from both civilians and people of power, who blocked their entry to schools and went out of their way to postpone the ruling from going into effect. One supporter of bills to delay school integration had the mentality that the postponement would “let people settle down, and face the matter realistically,” believing that history could not be turned back but neither could it be turned forward instantly, which was the ideal of the Brown v. Board decision (Bates a., 1962). The public push-back was so great that the Court decision might not have been implemented for a while, except for the activism of people who decided to make changes happen. The most well-known and powerful example of this activism, and the resistance that followed it, included a group of nine African American students, also known as the Little Rock Nine, who courageously enrolled in Central High School and decided to step out into the harsh world of racial discrimination to make a change in …show more content…
The governor of Arkansas at the time, Orval Faubus, discouraged school desegregation through his sponsorship of laws that maintained segregation along with promises of no school district ever being forced to mix races as long as he was governor (Walker, 2015, p. 24). Followers of Faubus supported his segregationist beliefs by reelecting him as governor, knowing his motives to disallow integration in various institutions in Little Rock. When school integration was mandated through the Brown v. Board decision, local residents expressed many threats of violence directed at students who would attempt to enter Central High School. Instead of condemning harm toward young men and women who desperately wanted a fair education, Faubus refused help or intervention from the federal government to help avoid violence (Walker, 2015, p. 26). These ideas and attitudes set the stage for the disruption that