Bolling v. Sharpe facts for kids
Quick facts for kids Bolling v. Sharpe |
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued December 10–11, 1952 Reargued December 8–9, 1953 Decided May 17, 1954 |
|
| Full case name | Spottswood Thomas Bolling, et al., Petitioners, v. C. Melvin Sharpe, President of the District of Columbia Board of Education, et al. |
| Citations | 347 U.S. 497 (more)
74 S. Ct. 693; 98 L. Ed. 884; 1954 U.S. LEXIS 2095; 53 Ohio Op. 331
|
| Prior history | Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit |
| Holding | |
| Racial segregation in the public schools of the District of Columbia is a denial of the due process of law guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Warren, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. V | |
Bolling v. Sharpe was an important case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1954. The Court ruled that it was against the Constitution to have separate public schools for different races in Washington, D.C..
This case was heard by the Court on December 10-11, 1952. It was reargued on December 8-9, 1953. The final decision came on May 17, 1954. This was the same day as the famous Brown v. Board of Education case. Both cases aimed to end racial segregation in schools.
The Bolling decision was special because it applied to Washington, D.C. The city is controlled by the federal government. The Court used the Fifth Amendment for its ruling. This amendment says that no person shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The Court said that separating students by race went against this idea of "due process."
Why This Case Happened
In the early 1940s, a group of parents in Washington, D.C., wanted change. They called themselves the Consolidated Parents Group. They asked the local school board to open a new school, John Philip Sousa Junior High, to all students. They wanted it to be a school where students of all races could learn together.
However, the school board said no. When the school opened, only white students were allowed to attend.
On September 11, 1950, the parents tried again. A leader named Gardner Bishop and others tried to enroll eleven African-American students. One of these students was Spottswood Bolling, who became the main plaintiff in the case. The school principal refused to let them in.
Taking the Case to Court
Because the school refused the students, the parents decided to sue. In 1951, James Nabrit Jr., a law professor from Howard University School of Law, helped them. Howard University is a historically Black university. Nabrit filed a lawsuit on behalf of Spottswood Bolling and the other students.
The first court dismissed their case. But the Supreme Court agreed to hear it in 1952. This meant the Supreme Court would review the lower court's decision. Professor George E. C. Hayes also worked with Nabrit on the arguments for the Supreme Court.
Nabrit argued that segregation itself was against the Constitution. This was a strong argument. The more famous Brown v. Board of Education case, decided on the same day, focused on a different point. It argued that "separate but equal" schools, allowed by an older case called Plessy v. Ferguson, were not truly equal. In reality, schools for Black students were often much worse.
The Supreme Court's Decision
The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Earl Warren, made a unanimous decision. This means all nine justices agreed. They sided with Spottswood Bolling and the other students.
Justice Warren explained the Court's reasoning. He noted that the 14th Amendment, which has an "Equal Protection Clause," applies to states. This clause says states cannot deny people equal protection under the law. However, the 14th Amendment does not directly apply to Washington, D.C., because it is a federal district, not a state.
But the Fifth Amendment does apply to the federal government, including Washington, D.C. While the Fifth Amendment does not have an "Equal Protection Clause," it does have a "Due Process Clause." This clause protects people from unfair government actions.
Justice Warren wrote that "equal protection" and "due process" are both about fairness. He said that unfair discrimination could violate "due process." The Court believed it would be "unthinkable" for the Constitution to allow segregation in federal schools when it prohibited it in state schools.
So, the Court concluded that "racial segregation in the public schools of the District of Columbia is a denial of the due process of law guaranteed by the 5th Amendment."
After this decision, the Court put both the Bolling and Brown cases on hold. They needed more time to figure out the best way to make schools desegregate across the country.
