Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

University of Michigan Law School

Civil Rights and Discrimination

Equal protection

1956

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Fourteenth Amendment Reconsidered, The Segregation Question, Alfred H. Kelly Jun 1956

The Fourteenth Amendment Reconsidered, The Segregation Question, Alfred H. Kelly

Michigan Law Review

Some sixty years ago in Plessy v. Ferguson the Supreme Court of the United States adopted the now celebrated "separate but equal" doctrine as a constitutional guidepost for state segregation statutes. Justice Brown's opinion declared that state statutes imposing racial segregation did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment, provided only that the statute in question guaranteed equal facilities for the two races. Brown's argument rested on a historical theory of the intent, although he offered no evidence to support it. "The object of the amendment," he said, "was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, …


Constitutional Law - Equal Protection - Legality Of Plans For Maintaining School Segregation, John B. Huck Jun 1956

Constitutional Law - Equal Protection - Legality Of Plans For Maintaining School Segregation, John B. Huck

Michigan Law Review

On May 19, 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States declared that segregation in public schools was a denial of equal protection of the law. Since that date many and varied plans have been proposed to maintain segregated education by avoiding the impact of the decision. The legality of three of these proposed avoidance devices will be analyzed in this comment.


Constitutional Law - Equal Protection - Determinable Fee As Devise To Impose Racial Restrictions On Use Of Land, Charles B. Renfrew S.Ed. Mar 1956

Constitutional Law - Equal Protection - Determinable Fee As Devise To Impose Racial Restrictions On Use Of Land, Charles B. Renfrew S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Land was conveyed by deed to the Park and Recreation Commission, a municipal corporation. The grant was in the nature of a determinable fee, with the land to revert to the grantor if it was ever used by members of any race other than the white race. Members of the colored race petitioned the Park and Recreation Commission for permission to use the recreational facilities erected on the land conveyed and the commission then sought a declaratory judgment as to the legal effect of the possibility of reverter contained in the deed, joining the petitioners and the grantors of the …