In 1954, the Supreme Court shows its commitment to equality liberalism after an era of protecting economic rights. Brown is a proper use of the Supreme Court’s power and its four shortcomings legitimate their decision. This era of equality allowed the court and social movements to work in synergy allowing for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 to be established.
Firstly, while the decision undermines the federal system that the 1787 constitution creates and forces the federal courts to micromanage local school boards without the proper implementation powers, this shortcoming shows the executive branch assisting with the implementation and therefore legitimating the decision of the judiciary. The Brown decision undermines …show more content…
Unlike Bailey, many African Americans were utilizing Brown’s precedent to desegregate other non-education public spheres. In Gayle v. Browder, a federal panel addresses that Plessy was implicitly overturned yet not explicitly stated, so the court desegregates the Montgomery and Alabama Bus system. The Supreme Court then issued a Per Curium upholding the lower court’s decision. This demonstrates how the social movements were able to mobilize not only through the streets through a bus boycott but were able to utilize Brown’s precedent and essentially provide equal liberalism. As Urofsky suggests, the court did not address Plessy in any of the cases before Brown like Oklahoma case or Sweatt yet examines the Plessy ruling and suggest that education, because of its importance, is exempted. Warren, only being Chief Justice for less than a year, did not want to lose his legitimacy by explicitly nullifying a major precedent so settled for implicitly ruling to overturn it. By not explicitly overturning Plessy, Brown’s strategy because if the constitutionality of Plessy was questioned the outcome of Brown might have resulted in segregated schools, or would have resulted in desegregation but with dissents among the Justices. Karlman suggests, that at one point in deciding Brown that there was almost a bare majority to uphold Plessy. He also …show more content…
Brown’s ruling engages in a synergy with the social movements that allows for a pivotal partnership that recognizes equality liberalism and allows for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of
Firstly, while the decision undermines the federal system that the 1787 constitution creates and forces the federal courts to micromanage local school boards without the proper implementation powers, this shortcoming shows the executive branch assisting with the implementation and therefore legitimating the decision of the judiciary. The Brown decision undermines …show more content…
Unlike Bailey, many African Americans were utilizing Brown’s precedent to desegregate other non-education public spheres. In Gayle v. Browder, a federal panel addresses that Plessy was implicitly overturned yet not explicitly stated, so the court desegregates the Montgomery and Alabama Bus system. The Supreme Court then issued a Per Curium upholding the lower court’s decision. This demonstrates how the social movements were able to mobilize not only through the streets through a bus boycott but were able to utilize Brown’s precedent and essentially provide equal liberalism. As Urofsky suggests, the court did not address Plessy in any of the cases before Brown like Oklahoma case or Sweatt yet examines the Plessy ruling and suggest that education, because of its importance, is exempted. Warren, only being Chief Justice for less than a year, did not want to lose his legitimacy by explicitly nullifying a major precedent so settled for implicitly ruling to overturn it. By not explicitly overturning Plessy, Brown’s strategy because if the constitutionality of Plessy was questioned the outcome of Brown might have resulted in segregated schools, or would have resulted in desegregation but with dissents among the Justices. Karlman suggests, that at one point in deciding Brown that there was almost a bare majority to uphold Plessy. He also …show more content…
Brown’s ruling engages in a synergy with the social movements that allows for a pivotal partnership that recognizes equality liberalism and allows for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of