During this week’s reading, my eye was caught by the actions of then-Governor of Arkansas Orval Faubus in the wake of Brown v. Board of Education II (1955). Even as he felt pressures from both the judicial and executive branches of government, he refused to comply with the new standards of racial equality.
In 1955, the Supreme Court issued a decision on the case that came to be known as Brown v. Board of Education II, ruling that states must immediately end any segregation in their school systems immediately. Not surprisingly, many states in the South fought this new regulation tooth and nail, but the textbook raised one particularly interesting case: Governor Orval Faubus. Facing reelection, he attempted to justify his now-illegal action of upholding segregation in his state’s school systems by holding that he was doing it to represent the desires of his constituency.
Even as the nine new black students (who came to be known as the Little Rock Nine) had legally gained the ability to attend Little Rock’s Central High School, he did whatever he could to preserve the institution of segregation in his state. This goal came to a …show more content…
In the context of this example, such conflict is occurring in two different theaters. One, the United States Supreme Court against the South - the former had ruled that segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, but being resistant to giving rights to blacks after having lost slavery, the South refused to comply. In the second case, the Arkansas federal courts and Governor Faubus - in compliance with the Brown v. Board of Education ruling, they urged him to integrate, but he blatantly disobeyed them and the rest of the federal government by creating roadblocks for the Little Rock
In 1955, the Supreme Court issued a decision on the case that came to be known as Brown v. Board of Education II, ruling that states must immediately end any segregation in their school systems immediately. Not surprisingly, many states in the South fought this new regulation tooth and nail, but the textbook raised one particularly interesting case: Governor Orval Faubus. Facing reelection, he attempted to justify his now-illegal action of upholding segregation in his state’s school systems by holding that he was doing it to represent the desires of his constituency.
Even as the nine new black students (who came to be known as the Little Rock Nine) had legally gained the ability to attend Little Rock’s Central High School, he did whatever he could to preserve the institution of segregation in his state. This goal came to a …show more content…
In the context of this example, such conflict is occurring in two different theaters. One, the United States Supreme Court against the South - the former had ruled that segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, but being resistant to giving rights to blacks after having lost slavery, the South refused to comply. In the second case, the Arkansas federal courts and Governor Faubus - in compliance with the Brown v. Board of Education ruling, they urged him to integrate, but he blatantly disobeyed them and the rest of the federal government by creating roadblocks for the Little Rock