# data[].attributes.body
The Civil Rights Movement was significant to our nation as it dismantled systemic racial segregation and discrimination, ensuring legal equality for African Americans and other marginalized groups.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
civil rights, guarantees of equal social opportunities and equal protection under the law, regardless of race, religion, or other personal characteristics.

Examples of civil rights include the right to vote, the right to a fair trial, the right to government services, the right to a public education, and the right to use public facilities. Civil rights are an essential component of democracy; when individuals are being denied opportunities to participate in political society, they are being denied their civil rights. In contrast to civil liberties, which are freedoms that are secured by placing restraints on government, civil rights are secured by positive government action, often in the form of legislation. Civil rights laws attempt to guarantee full and equal citizenship for people who have traditionally been discriminated against on the basis of some group characteristic. When the enforcement of civil rights is found by many to be inadequate, a civil rights movement may emerge in order to call for equal application of the laws without discrimination. Members of the movement may also engage in identity politics.

Unlike other rights concepts, such as human rights or natural rights, in which people acquire rights inherently, perhaps from God or nature, civil rights must be given and guaranteed by the power of the state. Therefore, they vary greatly over time, culture, and form of government and tend to follow societal trends that condone or abhor particular types of discrimination. For example, the civil rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer ( LGBTQ) community have only recently come to the forefront of political debate in some Western democracies.

Civil rights politics in the United States has its roots in the movement to end discrimination against African Americans. Though slavery was abolished and former slaves were officially granted political rights after the Civil War, in most Southern states African Americans continued to be systematically disenfranchised and excluded from public life, leading them to become perpetual second-class citizens. By the 1950s the marginalization of African Americans, often taking an extremely violent form, had spurred a social movement of epic proportions. The American civil rights movement, based mainly in African American churches and colleges of the South, involved marches, boycotts, and extensive efforts of civil disobedience, such as sit-ins, as well as voter education and voting drives. Most of these efforts were local in scope, but the impact was felt at the national level-a model of civil rights organizing that has since spread all over the globe.

Civil rights movements across the globe

In the 1960s the Roman Catholic-led civil rights movement in Northern Ireland was inspired by events in the United States. Its initial focus was fighting discriminatory gerrymandering that had been securing elections for Protestant unionists. Later, internment of Catholic activists by the British government sparked both a civil disobedience campaign and the more radical strategies of the Irish Republican Army (IRA), resulting in the violent sectarian conflict that became known as the Troubles (1968-98).

A high-profile civil rights movement led to the end of the South African system of racial segregation known as apartheid. The resistance movement began in the 1940s and intensified in the 1950s and '60s, when civil rights as a concept was sweeping the globe, but it was forced underground as most of its leaders were imprisoned, and it did not regain strength until the 1980s. International pressure combined with internal upheaval led to the eventual lifting of the ban on the African National Congress, the major Black party in South Africa, and the release from prison of Nelson Mandela in 1990. Mandela later became the first Black president of South Africa, in 1994.

A more recent movement that has striking parallels to both the American civil rights movement and the South African struggle against apartheid is the civil disobedience and political activism of the Dalits in India. The Dalits-formerly known as "untouchables" and now officially designated Scheduled Castes-constitute some one-sixth of the Indian population. However, for centuries they were forced to live as second-class citizens, and many were not even considered to be a part of India's varna system of social hierarchy. Dalit activism, including the efforts of Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, led to great victories, including the election of Kocheril Raman Narayanan to the presidency. The fact that the president of India is elected by parliament, whose members come principally from the upper castes, underlines how much the mentality has changed.

In addition to these international movements, many groups in the United States have been inspired by the successes of the American civil rights movement to fight for government protections, with varying degrees of success. Most notably, women, having gained the right to vote in 1920 via constitutional amendment, also have made many gains in the area of employment rights. The women's rights movement has thus far been stopped short of passage of the Equal Rights Amendment, which would have codified equal rights for women in the U.S. Constitution. Since its failure to be ratified in 1982, women have seen many gains in court decisions that ruled against sex discrimination and have seen the passing of legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which established a commission designed to investigate the persistence of the "glass ceiling" that has prevented women from advancing to top management positions in the workplace.

A number of other groups were the focus of civil rights movements since the 1960s. In 1968 the U.S. Congress passed the Indian Civil Rights Act. Latinos and Asian Americans fought for increased civil rights based on a history of discrimination over race, religion, language, and immigrant status. There were some successes in the form of provisions for bilingual education and affirmative action programs.

More recently, Arab Americans and the LGBTQ community took centre stage in the struggle to achieve equal protection and equal opportunity in American society. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Arab Americans suffered from heightened levels of discrimination and hate crimes and had to conform to government policies that restricted their liberties, as codified in the controversial USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.

The gay rights movement made some major gains in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Some states allowed same-sex marriage, and others granted benefits to same-sex civil partnerships, but at the beginning of the 21st century the majority of the U.S. population opposed same-sex marriage. Moreover, some social conservatives in the U.S. demanded a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. By 2010, however, about half of the U.S. population supported legalization of same-sex marriage, and, in June 2015 in its decision on the Obergefell v. Hodges case, the Supreme Court ruled that state bans on same-sex marriage and on recognizing same-sex marriages duly performed in other jurisdictions were unconstitutional under the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, thereby legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states.

Almost all countries actively deny civil rights to some minority groups. Because civil rights are enforced by countries, it is difficult to establish an international standard for civil rights protection, despite the efforts of international governance bodies such as the United Nations. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948, includes civil rights language but is not binding on member states. Civil rights tend to increase as governments feel pressure, either from national movements or other countries, to enact change.
Rebecca Hamlin The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Civil rights | Definition, Types, Activists, History, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Civil rights, guarantees of equal social opportunities and equal protection under the law regardless of race, religion, or other personal characteristics. Examples of civil rights include the right to vote, the right to a fair trial, the right to a public education, and the right to use public facilities.

# data[].attributes.body
In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, overturning the "separate but equal" ruling. This case set the foundation for equal access to education, emphasizing the importance of diversity and inclusion in schools today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Ryan Barrett, Third Year History
This is an extended 3,500 word research essay from the third year unit Black Lives Matter: The African American Freedom Struggle (1945-Present), receiving a mark of 70. The Brown vs Board of Education verdict acted as a catalyst for the end of legal segregation and provided a precedent for further litigation against segregation, ensuring its place as a canonised moment in the Civil Rights Movement. This essay succinctly explores the case and its ramifications, providing a useful reference point for those interested in the liberation of African Americans.
On May 17th, 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation in schools was unconstitutional. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Earl Warren, argued that segregated schools were inherently unequal, in spite of equalization of facilities, as they denoted feelings of inferiority amongst African American students. The implications of this decision were boundless, as it overturned Plessy vs Ferguson, the Supreme Court decision that segregation was legal, as long as facilities were equal. The Brown decision thus challenged, in theory, the system of legal segregation in the American South. However, Brown did not lead to the immediate desegregation of schools. There was a backlash to the decision, with racist politicians avoiding implementing the decision and racist Southerners forming organizations like the White Citizens' Councils, to attempt to uphold Southern segregation. Yet, by the late 1960s, the federal government had passed laws ending legal segregation in America. This essay will question how impactful the Brown decision was to ending legal segregation. It will argue that, despite not leading directly to school desegregation, it was a catalyst for segregation to be undermined and links to the Civil Rights legislation passed in the 1960s.

Scholars tend to agree that the Brown decision did not lead to desegregation in the Southern schooling system in the decade following the ruling. The major point of disagreement concerns whether Brown was an inspiration to the Civil Rights Movement. As the Civil Rights Movement led to the passage of the Civil Rights legislation, historians who see Brown as an inspiration draw a link between Brown and these acts. This is the majority opinion, being held by Clayborne Carson; David Garrow; Constance Motley; Waldo Martin; James Patterson; Brian Daugherity and Charles Bolton. While many of these scholars emphasize the various long-term factors that lay behind the emergence of the Civil Rights Movement, they all retain Brown's importance as a catalyst. Alternatively, there is a revisionist literature that denies Brown's direct importance to the Civil Rights Movement. Two scholars who hold this view are Michael Klarman and Gerald Rosenberg, who both believe that the Civil Rights Movement would have emerged regardless of the Brown case, thus the case was not necessary for ending legal segregation. Klarman, however, simultaneously canonizes Brown, arguing that indirectly, Brown did help lead to the legislation of the 1960s. Klarman's views will be examined in depth throughout this essay, as he simultaneously presents a convincing argument for why Brown was important, whilst dismissing vital evidence in a pursuit to undermine the traditional account.

In the short term, Brown did not lead to school desegregation. While some counties, for example Fayetteville and Charleston in Arkansas, desegregated in response to Brown, most school boards pursued a strategy of delaying desegregation indefinitely. The Supreme Court's ruling for implementation of the Brown decision, Brown II, assisted those who wished to delay implementation indefinitely. In Brown II, Justice Warren ruled that desegregation should be carried out 'with all deliberate speed', yet that local conditions should be considered when implementing the decision. Warren delegated implementation of Brown to local courts and argued that states should 'make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance.' Delegating implementation of Brown to the states that practiced de-jure segregation allowed for these states to delay implementation, which they had no intention of complying with. Therefore, most school boards did not implement school desegregation until 1964, when the Civil Rights Act allowed for 'federal ofﬁcials to cut off aid from school districts that practiced de-jure segregation.' Some states delayed implementation even further. For example, Mississippi implemented freedom of choice plans that were structured to ensure that as few African American children attended integrated schools. Mississippi thus saw limited desegregation until the Supreme Court ruled that these freedom of choice plans were unconstitutional in 1969. Furthermore, whilst legal school segregation had ended by the 1970s, the difficulties of implementing desegregation and the prevalence of white students entering private schools mean that schools are still some of the most de-facto segregated institutions in America today. As of 2000, only 28.4% of African American children attended majority white schools and 37.4% attended schools that were had 90% or more of students being from an ethnic minority.The fact that schools have never been fully desegregated has led Clayborne Carson to suggest that Brown should have both attacked segregation and unequal facilities, as this may have led to inequalities reducing quicker. Despite these reservations, the Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s and subsequent litigation was successful in bringing an end to de-jure segregation in public Southern facilities. Thus, if a direct link can be drawn between Brown and these acts and litigation, then Brown can be viewed as a catalyst for the elimination of legal segregation.

The backlash to the Brown case is one of the most important links in the chain that leads from Brown to the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s. Michael Klarman notably argued for what he referred to as 'the backlash thesis.' This thesis states that following Brown, there was a revolt against the decision in the South.This revolt led to race replacing class as the key issue in Southern politics, which led to many populist politicians who were moderates on racial issues being replaced with die-hard segregationists. These die-hard segregationists reacted to the Civil Rights Movement's protests with state organized violence. Civil Rights leaders anticipated that they would react with this violence, thus encouraged protestors to react with non-violence. The violence demonstrated by these racist officials towards peaceful protestors outraged Northern liberals and pushed for the federal government to act. For example, the Civil Rights Movement protested in Birmingham anticipating a violent reaction from Commissioner Bull Connor, a notoriously racist official. They sent out young students as protestors, who were attacked by the police with fire hoses and attack dogs. Images of these events prompted widespread outrage and led to the Kennedy administration introducing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This thesis shows how Brown can be indirectly linked to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

However, the backlash thesis has not received unanimous approval. Gerald Rosenberg opposes the idea that court decisions lead to widespread social change. He argued that Brown did not lead to the backlash, but that the Civil Rights Movement alone did. He additionally argued that regardless of whether die-hard segregationists were elected in the South or not, the Civil Rights Movement would have been confronted with violence, which would have provoked the government action seen in the 1960s. On the latter point, violence would have occurred towards the Civil Rights Protestors regardless of the election of die-hard segregationists. However, the fact that the violence that did occur was clearly authorized by elected Southern officials strengthened the hand of the Civil Rights Movement. This was because the violence being state authorized directly linked this violence to the system of legal segregation, thus directly demonstrating that the system itself was violent and necessary to abolish. If die-hard segregationists had not been elected, it is likely that moderate segregationists would have been able to disconnect violence from the system of segregation and retain the system for longer. The Albany campaign demonstrates this, as officials avoided using violence and were successfully able to prevent desegregation in the city. Rosenberg's argument that Brown did not lead to the backlash is enhanced by Klarman's argument linking the election of the die-hard segregationists to Brown being weak. Klarman looks at election results before and after Brown, showing that more die-hard segregationists were elected after Brown, yet does not show a direct link between these elections and Brown. As the Civil Rights Movement emerged shortly after Brown, it is unclear from Klarman's argument which factor led to the backlash. However, it can be shown that a large proportion of Southern resistance was directly linked to Brown.

Following the Brown decision, white Southern newspapers condemned it. The Jackson Mississippi Daily News published a racist article, comparing Brown to 'Bloodstains On White Marble Steps' and the University of Virginia Cavalier Daily said that the decision was 'contrary to a way of life' in the South. Additionally, in 1956, most Southern federal politicians signed the Southern Manifesto. This manifesto argued that the Brown decision was encroaching on the rights of the South and called for Southern states to 'resist forced integration by any lawful means.' As this manifesto was published whilst the Montgomery Bus Boycott was gaining national attention, it is notable that it emphasizes Brown as the threat to segregation that should be resisted, not the emerging Civil Rights Movement. The fate of several Southern politicians who refused to sign the manifesto links the election of die-hard segregationists directly to Brown. In North Carolina, Richard Chatham and Charles Deane refused to sign the manifesto and were defeated in subsequent primary elections.Harold Cooley, who also refused to sign, survived a primary attempt, but only as he adapted a strategy of appearing more racist than his opponent and 'proclaiming that he hated and despised the Brown decision.'These elections show how important opposing Brown was to Southern politics, backing up Klarman's thesis. Furthermore, the White Citizens' Councils, organizations formed to resist efforts to desegregate the South, were formed in the wake of Brown, before the major phase of the Civil Rights Movement. Therefore, this evidence shows that Brown was a vital factor in motivating Southern resistance to desegregation. Combined with Klarman's backlash thesis, this evidence shows that Brown was a catalyst towards ending legal segregation in America.

While Klarman's backlash thesis is compelling, his rejection of the traditional narrative of Brown's impact leaves a lot to be desired. The traditional narrative is that Brown, through overturning Plessey and declaring that the Supreme Court was on the side of desegregation, inspired many African Americans. Many of the African Americans who were inspired by the Brown decision would subsequently join the emerging Civil Rights Movement. This caused the Civil Rights Movement to grow, and this movement eventually led to the end of legal segregation in America. Thus, Brown can be directly linked to the end of legal segregation. Klarman argues that this narrative is incorrect and that Brown was not a major inspiration to the Civil Rights Movement. His primary pieces of evidence are a New York Times article that showed Civil Rights did not poll as one of America's most important issues following Brown and that Martin Luther King's rally on the anniversary of Brown had a low turnout. While Klarman acknowledges individual cases where Brown was an inspiration, he contends that several long-term factors were more important to the Civil Rights Movement's growth.One factor Klarman emphasizes was the Double Victory campaign, a campaign by black soldiers during WW2 to win democracy at home as well as abroad, alongside other factors such as the emergence of a black middle class and the increased urbanization of the South. While these long-term factors were important, Klarman's conclusion that these factors invalidate Brown negates the many pieces of evidence that show that the Brown decision was a widespread inspiration.

David Garrow has argued that the Brown decision was a widespread inspiration, yet the quotes he uses as evidence largely come from major figures of the Civil Rights Movement, like King and Rosa Parks. Quotes from major figures emphasizing Brown do exist, for example Martin Luther King emphasized that 'On May seventeenth, 1954, the Supreme Court of this nation rendered in simple and unequivocal terms one of the most momentous decisions ever rendered in the history of this nation... It came as a great beacon light of hope to millions.' Yet, there is also evidence from other sources, that show just how widespread inspiration following the Brown decision was, for example the reaction from African American newspapers. The Chicago Defender stated that the decision meant 'the beginning of the end of the dual society in American life.' The Richmond Afro-American produced a cartoon that showed how important they viewed the decision. In this cartoon, the Supreme Court's decision is represented by a nuclear explosion, with the words 'Decision on Segregated Schools' being written in the middle of the explosion. The fact that, in the context of the Cold War and mutually assured destruction, the cartoonist of the Richmond Afro-American viewed the Supreme Court's decision as being as important of an event as a nuclear explosion shows that the decision was seen by contemporaries as being momentous and impactful. Furthermore, in his book, James Patterson showed that many individual African Americans were directly inspired and moved by the Brown decision. Patterson quoted Sara Lightford, a 10-year-old African American girl, who recalled that 'jubilation, optimism and hope filled my home... for the first time in my life I saw tears in my father's eyes' following the Brown decision. He also quoted the black history professor Robert Jackson, who stated 'I haven't seen such collective emotion since the day Roosevelt died... today the students reacted as if a heavy burden had been lifted from their shoulders.' From these quotes, it becomes apparent that many individual African Americans felt that their rights had been won by the Brown decision. While the Brown decision did not lead to immediate desegregation, the reactions from all these individuals shows that people saw that the Brown decision as an opportunity for legal segregation to be undermined. Many of these individuals, after the disappointment of the years following Brown would have been inspired to join the growing Civil Rights Movement. The many testaments, from King, to African American newspapers, to the individuals who wept on the day Brown was announced, attest to inspiration being widespread. Thus, Brown be placed as a direct catalyst towards the growth of the Civil Rights Movement, thus can be directly linked to the legislation that ended legal segregation in America.

In addition to being a catalyst for the eventual passage of the Civil Rights Act 1964, Brown set a precedent for further litigation against legal segregation. For example, shortly after Brown, the Supreme Court used the ruling as a precedent to rule that segregated golf courses, public beaches and bathhouses were unconstitutional. The NAACP recognized the potential of Brown to lead directly to desegregation, so began litigation campaigns to desegregate individual school districts. Whilst this strategy took the form of gradualism and was often unsuccessful when faced with Southern resistance, there were occasions where the precedent of Brown caused individual districts to desegregate. For example, in 1955 the NAACP successfully sued the Van Buren school district in Arkansas and forced the district to implement a desegregation plan.Furthermore, litigation bought desegregation to the school district of Dollarway, which was ordered by federal courts to admit black students. Whilst this litigation was incomplete, affected a marginal amount of districts and took far too long to implement, its existence shows that the potential for Brown to be implemented through the courts existed. However, one of the most notable pieces of litigation linked directly to Brown is not related to school segregation, but to bus segregation. The Montgomery Bus Boycott is best remembered as the protest that thrust Martin Luther King into national attention, desegregated the Montgomery bus system and led to the formation of the SCLC. What is less well known is that, without litigation, the boycott would have been unsuccessful. Both the protest leaders and the city of Montgomery knew how important litigation was to the success of the boycott. The city of Montgomery consistently filed lawsuits to curtail the boycott, including the city declaring that the carpool system was illegal. The carpool system was used by boycotters as an alternative transport system to the buses, so the loss of this system could make the continuation of the boycott untenable. Whilst this was happening, the NAACP had filed the case Browder v. Gale, arguing that segregated buses were unconstitutional. When bought to the Supreme Court, they affirmed that segregation in buses was unconstitutional, citing the Brown case as a precedent. This ruling led to the desegregation of the Montgomery bus system, a landmark achievement for the emerging Civil Rights Movement. Thus, not only was Brown an inspiration for the Civil Rights Movement, but it also had a direct impact in the growth of the movement, through being used as precedent for one of the movement's initial victories.

In conclusion, this essay showed how the Brown decision was important to ending legal segregation in America. While it did not lead to swift desegregation of schools, the threat to segregation led to a backlash in the South. This violent backlash was capitalized on by the Civil Rights Movement, who pushed the federal government into formulating legislation that ended legal segregation. Additionally, the Brown case acted as an inspiration to the emerging Civil Rights Movement. While the long-term factors identified by many historians had to exist for the movement to emerge, the Brown case was seen by many African Americans as signaling the end of segregation. Many of these same African Americans were persuaded to become active in the Civil Rights Movement, which ended legal segregation in America. Brown was additionally used as a precedent to litigate against other forms of legal segregation, most notably in the case of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, one of the most important turning points in the Civil Rights Movement. For these reasons, Brown deserves to keep its place as a canonized moment in the Civil Rights Movement, as a catalyst for the events that ended legal segregation in America.

Secondary Sources

Badger, Tony, 'Southerners who Refused to Sign the Southern Manifesto', The Historical Journal, 42 (1999), pp.517-534.

Bolton, Charles, 'The Last Holdout: Mississippi and the Brown Decision' in With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), pp.123-138.

Brown, K.D., 'Brown v. Board of Education: Reexamination of the Desegregation of Public Education from the Perspective of the Post Desegregation Era', University of Toledo Law Review, pp.773-812.

Carson, Clayborne, 'Two Cheers for Brown v. Board of Education', The Journal of American History, 91 (2004), pp.26-31.

Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles, 'Introduction' in With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), pp.vii-xvi.

Garrow, David, 'Hopelessly Hollow History: Revisionist Devaluing of Brown v. Board of Education', 80 (1994), pp.151-160.

Glennon, Robert, 'The Role of Law in the Civil Rights Movement: The Montgomery Bus Boycott', Law and History Review, 9 (1991), pp.59-112.

Klarman, Michael, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), pp.7-150.

Klarman, Michael, 'How Brown Changed Racial Relations: The Backlash Thesis', The Journal of American History, 81 (1994), pp.81-118.

Lewis, Johanna Miller, 'Implementing Brown in Arkansas' in With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), pp.1-20.

Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents, (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998).

Motley, Constance, 'The Historical Setting of Brown and its Impact on the Supreme Court's Decision', Fordham Law Review, 61 (1992), pp.9-17.

Patterson, James, Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and its Troubled Legacy, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006).

Rosenberg, Gerald, 'Brown is Dead! Long Live Brown! The Endless Attempts to Canonize a Case', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), pp.161-171.

Tushnet, Mark, 'The Significance of Brown v. Board of Education', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), pp.173-184.

Primary Sources

Brown, Justice Henry, Majority Opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.76-80.

Chicago Defender, End of Dual Society (May 18, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), p.203.

Jackson Mississippi Daily News, Bloodstains On White Marble Steps (May 18, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), p.204.

King Jr., Martin Luther, Letter From a Birmingham Jail (12 June 1963) https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html [Accessed 7 November 2021].

King Jr., Martin Luther, "Desegregation and the Future" (December 15, 1956) https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/desegregation-and-future-address-delivered-annual-luncheon-national-committee [Accessed 7 November 2021].

Public Law 88-352 (July 2nd, 1964), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf [Accessed 6 November 2021].

Richmond Afro-American, A Supreme Court Bomb (May 22, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), p.217.

The Southern Manifesto (March 12, 1956) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.220-223.

University of Virginia Cavalier Daily, "Violates" Way of Life (May 18, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.206-207.

Warren, Chief Justice Earl, Opinion of the Court in Brown v. Board of Education (May 17, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.168-174.

Warren, Chief Justice Earl, Ruling on Relief (May 31, 1955) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.194-198.

Chief Justice Earl Warren, Opinion of the Court in Brown v. Board of Education (May 17, 1954) in Waldo Martin, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.173-174.

Clayborne Carson, 'Two Cheers for Brown v. Board of Education', The Journal of American History, 91 (2004), 27; David Garrow, 'Hopelessly Hollow History: Revisionist Devaluing of Brown v. Board of Education', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), 151-153; Constance Motley, 'The Historical Setting of Brown and its Impact on the Supreme Court's Decision', Fordham Law Review, 61 (1992), 16; James Patterson, Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006), pp.xiv-xvii; With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Brian Daugherity and Charles Bolton (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), p.vii; Martin, p.37.

Michael Klarman, 'How Brown Changed Race Relations: The Backlash Thesis', The Journal of American History, 81 (1994), 86-88; Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), 77-84; Gerald Rosenberg, 'Brown is Dead! Long Live Brown! The Endless Attempts to Canonize a Case', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), 163-165.

Patterson, p.137; Public Law 88-352 (July 2nd, 1964), pp.252-253 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf [Accessed 6 November 2021].

Public Law 88-352, p.246 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf [Accessed 6 November 2021].

Klarman, 'The Backlash Thesis', p.81-82.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 10-11.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 101.

Martin Luther King Jr., Letter From a Birmingham Jail (12 June 1963) https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html [Accessed 7 November 2021].

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 141-149.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 144-146.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 143.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 85-118.

Jackson Mississippi Daily News, Bloodstains On White Marble Steps (May 18, 1954) in Martin, p.204; University of Virginia Cavalier Daily, "Violates" Way of Life (May 18, 1954) in Martin, pp.206-207.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 11.

Klarman, 'The Backlash Thesis', 86, 89-90.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 79-82.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 14-18, 20-21, 52-65; Martin, p.6.

Martin Luther King Jr., "Desegregation and the Future" (December 15, 1956) https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/desegregation-and-future-address-delivered-annual-luncheon-national-committee [Accessed 7 November 2021].

Lewis, pp.9-10, Martin, p.12.

Glennon, p.84; Motley, p.15.

By Ryan Barrett, Third Year History
This is an extended 3,500 word research essay from the third year unit Black Lives Matter: The African American Freedom Struggle (1945-Present), receiving a mark of 70. The Brown vs Board of Education verdict acted as a catalyst for the end of legal segregation and provided a precedent for further litigation against segregation, ensuring its place as a canonised moment in the Civil Rights Movement. This essay succinctly explores the case and its ramifications, providing a useful reference point for those interested in the liberation of African Americans.
On May 17th, 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation in schools was unconstitutional. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Earl Warren, argued that segregated schools were inherently unequal, in spite of equalization of facilities, as they denoted feelings of inferiority amongst African American students. The implications of this decision were boundless, as it overturned Plessy vs Ferguson, the Supreme Court decision that segregation was legal, as long as facilities were equal. The Brown decision thus challenged, in theory, the system of legal segregation in the American South. However, Brown did not lead to the immediate desegregation of schools. There was a backlash to the decision, with racist politicians avoiding implementing the decision and racist Southerners forming organizations like the White Citizens' Councils, to attempt to uphold Southern segregation. Yet, by the late 1960s, the federal government had passed laws ending legal segregation in America. This essay will question how impactful the Brown decision was to ending legal segregation. It will argue that, despite not leading directly to school desegregation, it was a catalyst for segregation to be undermined and links to the Civil Rights legislation passed in the 1960s.

Scholars tend to agree that the Brown decision did not lead to desegregation in the Southern schooling system in the decade following the ruling. The major point of disagreement concerns whether Brown was an inspiration to the Civil Rights Movement. As the Civil Rights Movement led to the passage of the Civil Rights legislation, historians who see Brown as an inspiration draw a link between Brown and these acts. This is the majority opinion, being held by Clayborne Carson; David Garrow; Constance Motley; Waldo Martin; James Patterson; Brian Daugherity and Charles Bolton. While many of these scholars emphasize the various long-term factors that lay behind the emergence of the Civil Rights Movement, they all retain Brown's importance as a catalyst. Alternatively, there is a revisionist literature that denies Brown's direct importance to the Civil Rights Movement. Two scholars who hold this view are Michael Klarman and Gerald Rosenberg, who both believe that the Civil Rights Movement would have emerged regardless of the Brown case, thus the case was not necessary for ending legal segregation. Klarman, however, simultaneously canonizes Brown, arguing that indirectly, Brown did help lead to the legislation of the 1960s. Klarman's views will be examined in depth throughout this essay, as he simultaneously presents a convincing argument for why Brown was important, whilst dismissing vital evidence in a pursuit to undermine the traditional account.

In the short term, Brown did not lead to school desegregation. While some counties, for example Fayetteville and Charleston in Arkansas, desegregated in response to Brown, most school boards pursued a strategy of delaying desegregation indefinitely. The Supreme Court's ruling for implementation of the Brown decision, Brown II, assisted those who wished to delay implementation indefinitely. In Brown II, Justice Warren ruled that desegregation should be carried out 'with all deliberate speed', yet that local conditions should be considered when implementing the decision. Warren delegated implementation of Brown to local courts and argued that states should 'make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance.' Delegating implementation of Brown to the states that practiced de-jure segregation allowed for these states to delay implementation, which they had no intention of complying with. Therefore, most school boards did not implement school desegregation until 1964, when the Civil Rights Act allowed for 'federal ofﬁcials to cut off aid from school districts that practiced de-jure segregation.' Some states delayed implementation even further. For example, Mississippi implemented freedom of choice plans that were structured to ensure that as few African American children attended integrated schools. Mississippi thus saw limited desegregation until the Supreme Court ruled that these freedom of choice plans were unconstitutional in 1969. Furthermore, whilst legal school segregation had ended by the 1970s, the difficulties of implementing desegregation and the prevalence of white students entering private schools mean that schools are still some of the most de-facto segregated institutions in America today. As of 2000, only 28.4% of African American children attended majority white schools and 37.4% attended schools that were had 90% or more of students being from an ethnic minority.The fact that schools have never been fully desegregated has led Clayborne Carson to suggest that Brown should have both attacked segregation and unequal facilities, as this may have led to inequalities reducing quicker. Despite these reservations, the Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s and subsequent litigation was successful in bringing an end to de-jure segregation in public Southern facilities. Thus, if a direct link can be drawn between Brown and these acts and litigation, then Brown can be viewed as a catalyst for the elimination of legal segregation.

The backlash to the Brown case is one of the most important links in the chain that leads from Brown to the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s. Michael Klarman notably argued for what he referred to as 'the backlash thesis.' This thesis states that following Brown, there was a revolt against the decision in the South.This revolt led to race replacing class as the key issue in Southern politics, which led to many populist politicians who were moderates on racial issues being replaced with die-hard segregationists. These die-hard segregationists reacted to the Civil Rights Movement's protests with state organized violence. Civil Rights leaders anticipated that they would react with this violence, thus encouraged protestors to react with non-violence. The violence demonstrated by these racist officials towards peaceful protestors outraged Northern liberals and pushed for the federal government to act. For example, the Civil Rights Movement protested in Birmingham anticipating a violent reaction from Commissioner Bull Connor, a notoriously racist official. They sent out young students as protestors, who were attacked by the police with fire hoses and attack dogs. Images of these events prompted widespread outrage and led to the Kennedy administration introducing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This thesis shows how Brown can be indirectly linked to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

However, the backlash thesis has not received unanimous approval. Gerald Rosenberg opposes the idea that court decisions lead to widespread social change. He argued that Brown did not lead to the backlash, but that the Civil Rights Movement alone did. He additionally argued that regardless of whether die-hard segregationists were elected in the South or not, the Civil Rights Movement would have been confronted with violence, which would have provoked the government action seen in the 1960s. On the latter point, violence would have occurred towards the Civil Rights Protestors regardless of the election of die-hard segregationists. However, the fact that the violence that did occur was clearly authorized by elected Southern officials strengthened the hand of the Civil Rights Movement. This was because the violence being state authorized directly linked this violence to the system of legal segregation, thus directly demonstrating that the system itself was violent and necessary to abolish. If die-hard segregationists had not been elected, it is likely that moderate segregationists would have been able to disconnect violence from the system of segregation and retain the system for longer. The Albany campaign demonstrates this, as officials avoided using violence and were successfully able to prevent desegregation in the city. Rosenberg's argument that Brown did not lead to the backlash is enhanced by Klarman's argument linking the election of the die-hard segregationists to Brown being weak. Klarman looks at election results before and after Brown, showing that more die-hard segregationists were elected after Brown, yet does not show a direct link between these elections and Brown. As the Civil Rights Movement emerged shortly after Brown, it is unclear from Klarman's argument which factor led to the backlash. However, it can be shown that a large proportion of Southern resistance was directly linked to Brown.

Following the Brown decision, white Southern newspapers condemned it. The Jackson Mississippi Daily News published a racist article, comparing Brown to 'Bloodstains On White Marble Steps' and the University of Virginia Cavalier Daily said that the decision was 'contrary to a way of life' in the South. Additionally, in 1956, most Southern federal politicians signed the Southern Manifesto. This manifesto argued that the Brown decision was encroaching on the rights of the South and called for Southern states to 'resist forced integration by any lawful means.' As this manifesto was published whilst the Montgomery Bus Boycott was gaining national attention, it is notable that it emphasizes Brown as the threat to segregation that should be resisted, not the emerging Civil Rights Movement. The fate of several Southern politicians who refused to sign the manifesto links the election of die-hard segregationists directly to Brown. In North Carolina, Richard Chatham and Charles Deane refused to sign the manifesto and were defeated in subsequent primary elections.Harold Cooley, who also refused to sign, survived a primary attempt, but only as he adapted a strategy of appearing more racist than his opponent and 'proclaiming that he hated and despised the Brown decision.'These elections show how important opposing Brown was to Southern politics, backing up Klarman's thesis. Furthermore, the White Citizens' Councils, organizations formed to resist efforts to desegregate the South, were formed in the wake of Brown, before the major phase of the Civil Rights Movement. Therefore, this evidence shows that Brown was a vital factor in motivating Southern resistance to desegregation. Combined with Klarman's backlash thesis, this evidence shows that Brown was a catalyst towards ending legal segregation in America.

While Klarman's backlash thesis is compelling, his rejection of the traditional narrative of Brown's impact leaves a lot to be desired. The traditional narrative is that Brown, through overturning Plessey and declaring that the Supreme Court was on the side of desegregation, inspired many African Americans. Many of the African Americans who were inspired by the Brown decision would subsequently join the emerging Civil Rights Movement. This caused the Civil Rights Movement to grow, and this movement eventually led to the end of legal segregation in America. Thus, Brown can be directly linked to the end of legal segregation. Klarman argues that this narrative is incorrect and that Brown was not a major inspiration to the Civil Rights Movement. His primary pieces of evidence are a New York Times article that showed Civil Rights did not poll as one of America's most important issues following Brown and that Martin Luther King's rally on the anniversary of Brown had a low turnout. While Klarman acknowledges individual cases where Brown was an inspiration, he contends that several long-term factors were more important to the Civil Rights Movement's growth.One factor Klarman emphasizes was the Double Victory campaign, a campaign by black soldiers during WW2 to win democracy at home as well as abroad, alongside other factors such as the emergence of a black middle class and the increased urbanization of the South. While these long-term factors were important, Klarman's conclusion that these factors invalidate Brown negates the many pieces of evidence that show that the Brown decision was a widespread inspiration.

David Garrow has argued that the Brown decision was a widespread inspiration, yet the quotes he uses as evidence largely come from major figures of the Civil Rights Movement, like King and Rosa Parks. Quotes from major figures emphasizing Brown do exist, for example Martin Luther King emphasized that 'On May seventeenth, 1954, the Supreme Court of this nation rendered in simple and unequivocal terms one of the most momentous decisions ever rendered in the history of this nation... It came as a great beacon light of hope to millions.' Yet, there is also evidence from other sources, that show just how widespread inspiration following the Brown decision was, for example the reaction from African American newspapers. The Chicago Defender stated that the decision meant 'the beginning of the end of the dual society in American life.' The Richmond Afro-American produced a cartoon that showed how important they viewed the decision. In this cartoon, the Supreme Court's decision is represented by a nuclear explosion, with the words 'Decision on Segregated Schools' being written in the middle of the explosion. The fact that, in the context of the Cold War and mutually assured destruction, the cartoonist of the Richmond Afro-American viewed the Supreme Court's decision as being as important of an event as a nuclear explosion shows that the decision was seen by contemporaries as being momentous and impactful. Furthermore, in his book, James Patterson showed that many individual African Americans were directly inspired and moved by the Brown decision. Patterson quoted Sara Lightford, a 10-year-old African American girl, who recalled that 'jubilation, optimism and hope filled my home... for the first time in my life I saw tears in my father's eyes' following the Brown decision. He also quoted the black history professor Robert Jackson, who stated 'I haven't seen such collective emotion since the day Roosevelt died... today the students reacted as if a heavy burden had been lifted from their shoulders.' From these quotes, it becomes apparent that many individual African Americans felt that their rights had been won by the Brown decision. While the Brown decision did not lead to immediate desegregation, the reactions from all these individuals shows that people saw that the Brown decision as an opportunity for legal segregation to be undermined. Many of these individuals, after the disappointment of the years following Brown would have been inspired to join the growing Civil Rights Movement. The many testaments, from King, to African American newspapers, to the individuals who wept on the day Brown was announced, attest to inspiration being widespread. Thus, Brown be placed as a direct catalyst towards the growth of the Civil Rights Movement, thus can be directly linked to the legislation that ended legal segregation in America.

In addition to being a catalyst for the eventual passage of the Civil Rights Act 1964, Brown set a precedent for further litigation against legal segregation. For example, shortly after Brown, the Supreme Court used the ruling as a precedent to rule that segregated golf courses, public beaches and bathhouses were unconstitutional. The NAACP recognized the potential of Brown to lead directly to desegregation, so began litigation campaigns to desegregate individual school districts. Whilst this strategy took the form of gradualism and was often unsuccessful when faced with Southern resistance, there were occasions where the precedent of Brown caused individual districts to desegregate. For example, in 1955 the NAACP successfully sued the Van Buren school district in Arkansas and forced the district to implement a desegregation plan.Furthermore, litigation bought desegregation to the school district of Dollarway, which was ordered by federal courts to admit black students. Whilst this litigation was incomplete, affected a marginal amount of districts and took far too long to implement, its existence shows that the potential for Brown to be implemented through the courts existed. However, one of the most notable pieces of litigation linked directly to Brown is not related to school segregation, but to bus segregation. The Montgomery Bus Boycott is best remembered as the protest that thrust Martin Luther King into national attention, desegregated the Montgomery bus system and led to the formation of the SCLC. What is less well known is that, without litigation, the boycott would have been unsuccessful. Both the protest leaders and the city of Montgomery knew how important litigation was to the success of the boycott. The city of Montgomery consistently filed lawsuits to curtail the boycott, including the city declaring that the carpool system was illegal. The carpool system was used by boycotters as an alternative transport system to the buses, so the loss of this system could make the continuation of the boycott untenable. Whilst this was happening, the NAACP had filed the case Browder v. Gale, arguing that segregated buses were unconstitutional. When bought to the Supreme Court, they affirmed that segregation in buses was unconstitutional, citing the Brown case as a precedent. This ruling led to the desegregation of the Montgomery bus system, a landmark achievement for the emerging Civil Rights Movement. Thus, not only was Brown an inspiration for the Civil Rights Movement, but it also had a direct impact in the growth of the movement, through being used as precedent for one of the movement's initial victories.

In conclusion, this essay showed how the Brown decision was important to ending legal segregation in America. While it did not lead to swift desegregation of schools, the threat to segregation led to a backlash in the South. This violent backlash was capitalized on by the Civil Rights Movement, who pushed the federal government into formulating legislation that ended legal segregation. Additionally, the Brown case acted as an inspiration to the emerging Civil Rights Movement. While the long-term factors identified by many historians had to exist for the movement to emerge, the Brown case was seen by many African Americans as signaling the end of segregation. Many of these same African Americans were persuaded to become active in the Civil Rights Movement, which ended legal segregation in America. Brown was additionally used as a precedent to litigate against other forms of legal segregation, most notably in the case of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, one of the most important turning points in the Civil Rights Movement. For these reasons, Brown deserves to keep its place as a canonized moment in the Civil Rights Movement, as a catalyst for the events that ended legal segregation in America.

Secondary Sources

Badger, Tony, 'Southerners who Refused to Sign the Southern Manifesto', The Historical Journal, 42 (1999), pp.517-534.

Bolton, Charles, 'The Last Holdout: Mississippi and the Brown Decision' in With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), pp.123-138.

Brown, K.D., 'Brown v. Board of Education: Reexamination of the Desegregation of Public Education from the Perspective of the Post Desegregation Era', University of Toledo Law Review, pp.773-812.

Carson, Clayborne, 'Two Cheers for Brown v. Board of Education', The Journal of American History, 91 (2004), pp.26-31.

Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles, 'Introduction' in With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), pp.vii-xvi.

Garrow, David, 'Hopelessly Hollow History: Revisionist Devaluing of Brown v. Board of Education', 80 (1994), pp.151-160.

Glennon, Robert, 'The Role of Law in the Civil Rights Movement: The Montgomery Bus Boycott', Law and History Review, 9 (1991), pp.59-112.

Klarman, Michael, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), pp.7-150.

Klarman, Michael, 'How Brown Changed Racial Relations: The Backlash Thesis', The Journal of American History, 81 (1994), pp.81-118.

Lewis, Johanna Miller, 'Implementing Brown in Arkansas' in With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Daugherity, Brian and Bolton, Charles (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), pp.1-20.

Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents, (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998).

Motley, Constance, 'The Historical Setting of Brown and its Impact on the Supreme Court's Decision', Fordham Law Review, 61 (1992), pp.9-17.

Patterson, James, Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and its Troubled Legacy, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006).

Rosenberg, Gerald, 'Brown is Dead! Long Live Brown! The Endless Attempts to Canonize a Case', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), pp.161-171.

Tushnet, Mark, 'The Significance of Brown v. Board of Education', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), pp.173-184.

Primary Sources

Brown, Justice Henry, Majority Opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.76-80.

Chicago Defender, End of Dual Society (May 18, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), p.203.

Jackson Mississippi Daily News, Bloodstains On White Marble Steps (May 18, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), p.204.

King Jr., Martin Luther, Letter From a Birmingham Jail (12 June 1963) https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html [Accessed 7 November 2021].

King Jr., Martin Luther, "Desegregation and the Future" (December 15, 1956) https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/desegregation-and-future-address-delivered-annual-luncheon-national-committee [Accessed 7 November 2021].

Public Law 88-352 (July 2nd, 1964), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf [Accessed 6 November 2021].

Richmond Afro-American, A Supreme Court Bomb (May 22, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), p.217.

The Southern Manifesto (March 12, 1956) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.220-223.

University of Virginia Cavalier Daily, "Violates" Way of Life (May 18, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.206-207.

Warren, Chief Justice Earl, Opinion of the Court in Brown v. Board of Education (May 17, 1954) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.168-174.

Warren, Chief Justice Earl, Ruling on Relief (May 31, 1955) in Martin, Waldo, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.194-198.

Chief Justice Earl Warren, Opinion of the Court in Brown v. Board of Education (May 17, 1954) in Waldo Martin, Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 1998), pp.173-174.

Clayborne Carson, 'Two Cheers for Brown v. Board of Education', The Journal of American History, 91 (2004), 27; David Garrow, 'Hopelessly Hollow History: Revisionist Devaluing of Brown v. Board of Education', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), 151-153; Constance Motley, 'The Historical Setting of Brown and its Impact on the Supreme Court's Decision', Fordham Law Review, 61 (1992), 16; James Patterson, Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006), pp.xiv-xvii; With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education, ed. by Brian Daugherity and Charles Bolton (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2008), p.vii; Martin, p.37.

Michael Klarman, 'How Brown Changed Race Relations: The Backlash Thesis', The Journal of American History, 81 (1994), 86-88; Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), 77-84; Gerald Rosenberg, 'Brown is Dead! Long Live Brown! The Endless Attempts to Canonize a Case', Virginia Law Review, 80 (1994), 163-165.

Patterson, p.137; Public Law 88-352 (July 2nd, 1964), pp.252-253 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf [Accessed 6 November 2021].

Public Law 88-352, p.246 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf [Accessed 6 November 2021].

Klarman, 'The Backlash Thesis', p.81-82.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 10-11.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 101.

Martin Luther King Jr., Letter From a Birmingham Jail (12 June 1963) https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html [Accessed 7 November 2021].

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 141-149.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 144-146.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 143.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 85-118.

Jackson Mississippi Daily News, Bloodstains On White Marble Steps (May 18, 1954) in Martin, p.204; University of Virginia Cavalier Daily, "Violates" Way of Life (May 18, 1954) in Martin, pp.206-207.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 11.

Klarman, 'The Backlash Thesis', 86, 89-90.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 79-82.

Klarman, 'Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement', 14-18, 20-21, 52-65; Martin, p.6.

Martin Luther King Jr., "Desegregation and the Future" (December 15, 1956) https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/desegregation-and-future-address-delivered-annual-luncheon-national-committee [Accessed 7 November 2021].

Lewis, pp.9-10, Martin, p.12.

Glennon, p.84; Motley, p.15.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Important was the 1954 Brown vs Board of Education Verdict to Ending Legal Segregation in America? - The Bristorian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is an extended 3,500 word research essay from the third year unit Black Lives Matter: The African American Freedom Struggle (1945-Present), receiving a mark of 70.

# data[].attributes.body
The Montgomery Bus Boycott, sparked by Rosa Parks' arrest, was a year-long boycott leading to the desegregation of public transportation and showcased the power of public activism. This highlights the importance of student activism and the role of individuals in advocating for systemic change, which continues to inspire social justice efforts in schools today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In commemoration of the anniversary of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, today's post comes from Sarah Basilion, an intern in the National Archives History Office.
Sixty years ago, Rosa Parks, a 42-year-old black woman, refused to give up her seat to a white passenger on a Montgomery, Alabama, public bus.

On December 1, 1955, Parks, a seamstress and secretary for the Montgomery chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), was taking the bus home after a long day of work.

The white section of the bus had filled, so the driver asked Parks to give up her seat in the designated black section of the bus to accommodate a white passenger.

She refused to move.

When it became apparent after several minutes of argument that Parks would not relent, the bus driver called the police. Parks was arrested for being in violation of Chapter 6, Section 11, of the Montgomery City Code, which upheld a policy of racial segregation on public buses.

Parks was not the first person to engage in this act of civil disobedience.

Earlier that year, 15-year-old Claudette Colvin refused to give up her seat on a Montgomery bus. She was arrested, but local civil rights leaders were concerned that she was too young and poor to be a sympathetic plaintiff to challenge segregation.

Parks-a middle-class, well-respected civil rights activist-was the ideal candidate.

Just a few days after Parks's arrest, activists announced plans for the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

The boycott, which officially began December 5, 1955, did not support just Parks but countless other African Americans who had been arrested for the same reason.

E. D. Nixon, president of the local NAACP chapter, called for all African-American citizens to boycott the public bus system to protest the segregation policy. Nixon and his supporters vowed to abstain from riding Montgomery public buses until the policy was abolished.

Instead of buses, African Americans took taxis driven by black drivers who had lowered their fares in support of the boycott, walked, cycled, drove private cars, and even rode mules or drove in horse-drawn carriages to get around. African-American citizens made up a full three-quarters of regular bus riders, causing the boycott to have a strong economic impact on the public transportation system and on the city of Montgomery as a whole.

The boycott was proving to be a successful means of protest.

The city of Montgomery tried multiple tactics to subvert the efforts of boycotters. They instituted regulations for cab fares that prevented black cab drivers from offering lower fares to support boycotters. The city also pressured car insurance companies to revoke or refuse insurance to black car owners so they could not use their private vehicles for transportation in lieu of taking the bus.

Montgomery's efforts were futile as the local black community, with the support of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., churches-and citizens around the nation-were determined to continue with the boycott until their demand for racially integrated buses was met.

The boycott lasted from December 1, 1955, when Rosa Parks was arrested, to December 20, 1956, when Browder v. Gayle, a Federal ruling declaring racially segregated seating on buses to be unconstitutional, took effect.

Although it took more than a year, Rosa Parks's refusal to give up her seat on a public bus sparked incredible change that would forever impact civil rights in the United States.

Parks continued to raise awareness for the black struggle in America and the Civil Rights movement for the rest of her life. For her efforts she was awarded both the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest honor given by the executive branch, and the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest honor given by the legislative branch.

To learn more about the life of Rosa Parks, read Michael Hussey's 2013 Pieces of History post Honoring the "Mother of the Civil Rights Movement. "

And plan your visit to the National Archives to view similar documents in our " Records of Rights" exhibit or explore documents in our online catalog.

Copies of documents relating to Parks's arrest submitted as evidence in the Browder v. Gayle case are held in the National Archives at Atlanta in Morrow, Georgia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In commemoration of the anniversary of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, today's post comes from Sarah Basilion, an intern in the National Archives History Office. Sixty years ago, Rosa Parks, a 42-year-...

# data[].attributes.body
In 1957, nine African American students integrated Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, despite violent opposition, with federal intervention ensuring their safety. Their courage highlights the ongoing need to confront racial inequalities and ensure equitable learning environments in schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Desegregation of Schools

In its Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision, issued May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that segregation of America's public schools was unconstitutional.

Until the court's decision, many states across the nation had mandatory segregation laws, or Jim Crow laws, requiring African American and white children to attend separate schools. Resistance to the ruling was so widespread that the court issued a second decision in 1955, known as Brown II, ordering school districts to integrate "with all deliberate speed."

Little Rock Central High School

In response to the Brown decisions and pressure from the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People ( NAACP), the Little Rock, Arkansas, school board adopted a plan for gradual integration of its schools.

The first institutions to integrate would be the high schools, beginning in September 1957. Among these was Little Rock Central High School, which opened in 1927 and was originally called Little Rock Senior High School.

Two pro-segregation groups formed to oppose the plan: The Capital Citizens Council and the Mother's League of Central High School.

Who Were the Little Rock Nine?

Despite the virulent opposition, nine students registered to be the first African Americans to attend Central High School. Minnijean Brown, Elizabeth Eckford, Ernest Green, Thelma Mothershed, Melba Patillo, Gloria Ray, Terrence Roberts, Jefferson Thomas and Carlotta Walls had been recruited by Daisy Gaston Bates, president of the Arkansas NAACP and co-publisher of the Arkansas State Press, an influential African American newspaper.

Daisy Bates and others from the Arkansas NAACP carefully vetted the group of students and determined they all possessed the strength and determination to face the resistance they would encounter. In the weeks prior to the start of the new school year, the students participated in intensive counseling sessions guiding them on what to expect once classes began and how to respond to anticipated hostile situations.

The group soon became famous as the Little Rock Nine.

Orval Faubus

On September 2, 1957, Governor Orval Faubus announced that he would call in the Arkansas National Guard to prevent the African American students' entry to Central High, claiming this action was for the students' own protection. In a televised address, Faubus insisted that violence and bloodshed might break out if Black students were allowed to enter the school.

The Mother's League held a sunrise service at the school on September 3 as a protest against integration. But that afternoon, federal judge Ronald Davies issued a ruling that desegregation would continue as planned the next day.

Elizabeth Eckford

The Little Rock Nine arrived for the first day of school at Central High on September 4, 1957. Eight arrived together, driven by Bates.

Elizabeth Eckford's family, however, did not have a telephone, and Bates could not reach her to let her know of the carpool plans. Therefore, Eckford arrived alone.

The Arkansas National Guard, under orders of Governor Faubus, prevented any of the Little Rock Nine from entering the doors of Central High. One of the most enduring images from this day is a photograph of Eckford, alone with a notebook in her hand, stoically approaching the school as a crowd of hostile and screaming white students and adults surround her.

Eckford later recalled that one of the women spat on her. The image was printed and broadcast widely in the United States and abroad, bringing the Little Rock controversy to national and international attention.

Ronald Davies

In the following weeks, federal judge Ronald Davies began legal proceedings against Governor Faubus, and President Dwight D. Eisenhower attempted to persuade Faubus to remove the National Guard and let the Little Rock Nine enter the school.

Judge Davies ordered the Guard removed on September 20, and the Little Rock Police Department took over to maintain order. The police escorted the nine African American students into the school on September 23, through an angry mob of some 1,000 white protesters gathered outside. Amidst ensuing rioting, the police removed the nine students.

The following day, President Eisenhower sent in 1,200 members of the U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division from Fort Campbell, Kentucky, and placed them in charge of the 10,000 National Guardsmen on duty. Escorted by the troops, the Little Rock Nine attended their first full day of classes on September 25.

Numerous legal challenges to integration continued throughout the year, and Faubus repeatedly expressed his wish that the Little Rock Nine be removed from Central High.

Although several of the Black students had positive experiences on their first day of school, according to a September 25, 1957, report in The New York Times, they experienced routine harassment and even violence throughout the rest of the year.

Melba Patillo, for instance, was kicked, beaten and had acid thrown in her face. At one point, white students burned an African American effigy in a vacant lot across from the school. Gloria Ray was pushed down a flight of stairs, and the Little Rock Nine were barred from participating in extracurricular activities.

Minnijean Brown was expelled from Central High School in February 1958 for retaliating against the attacks. Harassment went beyond the students: Gloria Ray's mother was fired from her job with the State of Arkansas when she refused to remove her daughter from the school. The 101st Airborne and the National Guard remained at Central High School for the duration of the year.

Ernest Green

On May 25, 1958, Ernest Green, the only senior among the Little Rock Nine, became the first African American graduate of Central High.

In September 1958, one year after Central High was integrated, Governor Faubus closed all of Little Rock's high schools for the entire year, pending a public vote, to prevent African American attendance. Little Rock citizens voted 19,470 to 7,561 against integration and the schools remained closed.

Other than Green, the rest of the Little Rock Nine completed their high school careers via correspondence or at other high schools across the country. Eckford joined the Army and later earned her General Education Equivalency diploma. Little Rock's high schools reopened in August 1959.

Did you know? Civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. attended graduation ceremonies at Central High School in May 1958 to see Ernest Green, the only senior among the Little Rock Nine, receive his diploma.

Little Rock Nine Aftermath

Several of the Little Rock Nine went on to distinguished careers.

Green served as assistant secretary of the federal Department of Labor under President Jimmy Carter. Brown worked as deputy assistant secretary for workforce diversity in the Department of the Interior under President Bill Clinton. Patillo worked as a reporter for NBC.

The group has been widely recognized for their significant role in the civil rights movement. In 1999, President Clinton awarded each member of the group the Congressional Gold Medal. The nine also all received personal invitations to attend the inauguration of President Barack Obama in 2009.

Jefferson Thomas became the first of the Little Rock Nine to die when he succumbed to pancreatic cancer at the age of 67 on September 5, 2010. After graduating from Central High, Thomas served in the Army in Vietnam, earned a business degree and worked as an accountant for private companies and the Pentagon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Little Rock Nine - Definition, Names & Facts | HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Little Rock Nine were a group of nine Black students who enrolled at formerly all-white Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, in September 1957. Their attendance at the school was a test of Brown v. Board of Education, a landmark 1954 Supreme Court ruling that declared segregation in public schools unconstitutional.

# data[].attributes.body
These were non-violent protests, such as sit-ins at segregated lunch counters and Freedom Rides on interstate buses, challenging segregation laws and practices. These actions emphasized the importance of standing up against injustices, a lesson often taught in education today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Seated for Justice, Riding for Freedom: The Impact of Sit-ins and Freedom Rides (1960-1961)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As we honour Black History Month in the USA, it is essential to delve into the impactful events of the Civil Rights Movement. From a British perspective,

# data[].attributes.body
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, or national origin in public places, workplaces, and schools. This legally mandated equal opportunities in education, influencing policies that combat discrimination and promote equity in schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Politics Of Passing 1964's Civil Rights Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The act, which turns 50 this year, ended the era of legal segregation in public accommodations, like restaurants and hotels.

# data[].attributes.body
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 eliminated barriers like literacy tests and poll taxes that "disenfranchised" black voters, strengthening democratic participation. It shows the importance of teaching civic responsibility and voter education to empower future generations.

# data[].attributes.body
The Selma to Montgomery Marches in 1965 highlighted the fight for voting rights, and the dismantlement of Jim Crow laws. They teach students the power of peaceful protest for change, fostering civic awareness today.

# data[].attributes.body
The Fair Housing Act of 1968 banned discrimination in housing, addressing systemic inequality in living conditions and access to resources. Equitable housing policies directly impact school zoning and resources, reminding educators of the connection between social justice and educational access.

# data[].attributes.body
The Civil Rights Movement was significant to our nation as it dismantled systemic racial segregation and discrimination, ensuring legal equality for African Americans and other marginalized groups. Many aspects of the Civil Rights Movement also contributed to our education today. The Civil Rights Movement was significant to our nation as it dismantled systemic racial segregation and discrimination, ensuring legal equality for African Americans and other marginalized groups.
In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, overturning the "separate but equal" ruling. This case set the foundation for equal access to education, emphasizing the importance of diversity and inclusion in schools today. The Montgomery Bus Boycott, sparked by Rosa Parks' arrest, was a year-long boycott leading to the desegregation of public transportation and showcasing the power of public activism. This highlights the importance of student activism and the role of individuals in advocating for systemic change, which continues to inspire social justice efforts in schools today. In 1957, nine African American students integrated Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, despite violent opposition, with federal intervention ensuring their safety. Their courage highlights the ongoing need to confront racial inequalities and ensure equitable learning environments in schools. Sit-Ins and freedom rides in the 1960's were non-violent protests, such as sit-ins at segregated lunch counters and Freedom Rides on interstate buses, challenging segregation laws and practices. These actions emphasized the importance of standing up against injustices, a lesson often taught in education today. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibited discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, or national origin in public places, workplaces, and schools. This legally mandated equal opportunities in education, influencing policies that combat discrimination and promote equity in schools. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 eliminated barriers like literacy tests and poll taxes that "disenfranchised" black voters, strengthening democratic participation. It shows the importance of teaching civic responsibility and voter education to empower future generations. The Selma to Montgomery Marches in 1965 highlighted the fight for voting rights and the dismantlement of Jim Crow laws. They teach students the power of peaceful protest for change, fostering civic awareness today. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 banned discrimination in housing, addressing systemic inequality in living conditions and access to resources. Equitable housing policies directly impact school zoning and resources, reminding educators of the connection between social justice and educational access.