Ann. He may wait in line in the cafeteria and there stand and talk with his fellow students, but while he eats he must remain apart. Public facilities like bathrooms and water fountains were segregated. McLaurin had to sit at a separate table in classrooms, the library, and the cafeteria. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION ET AL, holding that a state sponsored graduate school's disparate treatment of an admitted black student based on his race violated the Equal Protection Clause. Such restrictions impaired and inhibited his ability to study, to engage in discussions, exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession. Civ. Our society grows increasingly complex, and our need for trained leaders increases correspondingly. 24 chapters | She has been a classroom teacher for the past ten years. Can a state treat a student differently from other students solely because of race? The amendment provided, however, that in such cases the program of instruction shall be given at such colleges or institutions of higher education upon a segregated basis [1]. The court found that the university's inaction in providing separate facilities, in order to meet Oklahoma state law, allowing McLaurin to attend the institution was a violation of his Constitutional rights. Robert L. Carter and Amos T. Hall argued the cause for appellant. Our society grows increasingly complex, and our need for trained leaders increases correspondingly. 526; 1948 U.S. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. In 1950 a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that McLaurin had not received equal treatment as required by the Constitution. 4039. . As a result, the court pointed out, the plaintiff was held back in pursuit of his education, because he was unable to debate and discuss his ideas with other students and faculty, with the result that his ability to learn his chosen profession, teaching, was hampered. (a) The restrictions imposed upon appellant impair and inhibit his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession. This appeal followed. State survey of the federal grant review process, State responses to the federal grant review process survey, 2021, State responses by question to the federal grant review process survey, 2021, Federalism by the numbers: Federal mandates, Federalism by the numbers: Federal grants-in-aid, Federalism by the numbers: Federal information collection requests, Overview of federal spending during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, Full text of case syllabus and opinions (Justia), Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy, https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=McLaurin_v._Oklahoma_State_Regents&oldid=8950237, Pages using DynamicPageList3 dplreplace parser function, Federalism court cases, equal protection clause, Conflicts in school board elections, 2021-2022, Special Congressional elections (2023-2024), 2022 Congressional Competitiveness Report, State Executive Competitiveness Report, 2022, State Legislative Competitiveness Report, 2022, Partisanship in 2022 United States local elections. 526, that the State had a constitutional duty to provide him with the education he sought as soon as it provided that education for applicants of any other group. See Sweatt v. Painter, 339 U.S. 629, 70 S.Ct. Subscribe Now. Appellant, a Negro citizen of Oklahoma possessing a master's degree, was admitted to the Graduate School of the state-supported University of Oklahoma as a candidate for a doctorate in education and was permitted to use the same classroom, library and cafeteria as white students. The U.S. Supreme Court was clear in its verbiage that a major part of education is the discussion and "comingling" of intellectual abilities. The proceedings below are stated in the opinion. 0000071186 00000 n WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950) McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. In McLaurin, the Supreme Court found that an African-American student should be admitted to a white graduate school, and be treated like other students, because of the importance of his "ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and in general to learn his profession.". Citing our decisions in State of Missouri ex rel. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950) was a case regarding higher education that was decided by the United States Supreme Court saying that colleges and universities could not segregate students under the Fourteenth Amendment. Updates? 208, and Sipuel v. Board of Regents, 1948, 332 U.S. 631, 68 S.Ct. Click here to contact our editorial staff, and click here to report an error. 0000000836 00000 n McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950) was a case regarding higher education that was decided by the United States Supreme Court saying that colleges Appellant, a Negro citizen of Oklahoma possessing a master's degree, was admitted to the Graduate School of the state supported University of Oklahoma as a candidate for a doctorate in education and was permitted to use the same classroom, library and cafeteria as white students. The Civil Rights Movement Begins Age 12 The civil rights movement was a movement to enforce constitutional and legal rights for African Americans that the other Americans enjoyed. 528; 1949 U.S. In this case, we are faced with the question whether a state may, after admitting a student to graduate instruction in its state university, afford him different treatment from other students solely because of his race. In 2001, the Bizzell Memorial Library, the main library at the University of Oklahoma, was designated a U.S. National Historic Landmark in commemoration of this case. Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login). These restrictions were obviously imposed in order to comply, as nearly as could be, with the statutory requirements of Oklahoma. Fred Hansen, First Assistant Attorney General of Oklahoma, argued the cause for appellees. These factors are elemental to robust education. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. Sweatt v. Painter: Summary, Decision & Significance, Feiner v. New York (1951): Case Brief, Significance & Facts, Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, Dennis v. United States: Summary, Significance & Decision, Stack v. Boyle (1951): Case Brief, Facts & Decision, Rochin v. California: Case Brief, Summary & Significance, Beauharnais v. Illinois: Summary & Dissent, United States v. Reynolds (1953): Summary & Dissenting Opinion, Hernandez v. Texas: Summary & Significance, Praxis Social Studies: Content Knowledge (5081) Prep, Praxis Earth and Space Sciences: Content Knowledge (5571) Prep, Praxis Core Academic Skills for Educators - Writing (5723): Study Guide & Practice, ILTS TAP - Test of Academic Proficiency (400): Practice & Study Guide, Praxis Biology: Content Knowledge (5235) Prep, Introduction to American Government: Certificate Program, Introduction to Counseling: Certificate Program, Praxis Business Education: Content Knowledge (5101) Prep, Sociology 103: Foundations of Gerontology, NY Regents Exam - Global History and Geography: Tutoring Solution, Jane Seymour & Henry VIII: Facts & History, The Battle of Lake Erie in 1813: Summary & Facts, Annapolis Convention of 1786: Definition & Overview, The Trent Affair of 1861: Definition & Summary, Invention of the Telegraph: History & Overview, Who Were Lewis and Clark? To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637, 640 (1950). Pursuant to a requirement of state law that the instruction of Negroes in institutions of higher education be "upon a segregated basis," however, he was assigned to a seat in the classroom in a row specified for Negro students, was assigned to a special table in the library, and, although permitted to eat in the cafeteria at the same time as other students, was assigned to a special table there. 0000001634 00000 n At that time, his application was denied, solely because of his race. In the interval between the decision of the court below and the hearing in this Court, the treatment afforded appellant was altered. See Sweatt v. Painter, ante, p. 629. (1941) 455, 456, 457, that the instruction of black students in institutions of higher education be "upon a segregated basis," however, he was assigned to a seat in the classroom in a row specified for black students, was assigned to a special table in the library, and, although permitted to eat in the cafeteria at the same time as other students, was assigned to a special table there. He is now assigned to a seat in the classroom in a row specified for colored students; he is assigned to a table in the library on the main floor; and he is permitted to eat at the same time in the cafeteria as other students, although here again he is assigned to a special table. 0000062655 00000 n Appellant filed a complaint requesting injunctive relief, alleging that the action of the school authorities and the statutes upon which their action was based were unconstitutional and deprived him of the equal protection of the laws. This includes individual articles (copyright to OHS by author assignment) and corporately (as a complete body of work), including web design, graphics, searching functions, and listing/browsing methods. Marian W. Perry and Franklin H. Williams were also of counsel. McLaurin then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In fact, as the court noted, the restrictions were designed to comply with the state statute that had required officials in institutions of higher education to treat students differently based on their races. In McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, supra [ 339 U.S. 637, 70 S.Ct. This we think irrelevant. In this case, we are faced with the question whether a state may, after admitting a student to graduate instruction in its state university, afford him different treatment from other students solely because of his race. Reversing, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a state could not treat a student differently from other students on the basis of race as theFourteenth Amendmentprecludes such differences in treatment. Name Meaning Pitts Linda Joan 1 English: variant of Pitt .2 Americanized spelling of German Pitz . P. 642. While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. The following (as per The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition) is the preferred citation for articles:Alfred L. Brophy, McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950), The Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture, https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=MC034. Ablack citizen of Oklahoma possessing a master's degree was admitted to the Graduate School of the state-supported University of Oklahoma as a candidate for a doctorate in education and was permitted to use the same classroom, library and cafeteria as white students. 526 (W. D. Okla. 1949). In apparent conformity with the amendment, his admission was made subject to "such rules and regulations as to segregation as the President of the University shall consider to afford to Mr. G. W. McLaurin substantially equal educational opportunities as are afforded to other persons seeking the same education in the Graduate College," a condition which does not appear to have been withdrawn. Hoping to earn a doctorate in education, he applied for admission to graduate study at Oklahoma's all At the time, an Oklahoma law made it a misdemeanor to operate, teach at, or attend an educational institution that admitted both white and black students. The case McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents began when the University of Oklahoma denied George McLaurin into its graduate program because of his race. But they signify that the State, in administering the facilities it affords for professional and graduate study, sets McLaurin apart from the other students. 247, a statutory three-judge District Court held, 87 F.Supp. WebBoard of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 332 U.S. 631; cf. 232, 83 L.Ed. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents 2,513 views Jul 7, 2016 29 Dislike Share Save OU IACH 2.33K subscribers In this lecture, professor Kathryn Schumaker reviews the Omissions? Dist.) Appellant filed a complaint requesting injunctive relief, alleging that the action of the school authorities and the statutes upon which their action was based were unconstitutional and deprived him of the equal protection of the laws. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950), was a United States Supreme Court case that prohibited racial segregation in state supported graduate or professional education. , nor was it intended to enforce social equality between classes and races." The removal of the state restrictions will not necessarily abate individual and group predilections, prejudices and choices. 1, Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney, Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan. In this ruling and its companion case, Sweatt v. Painter, decided on the same day, the Supreme Court held that African American students must receive the same treatment as all other students in the realm of higher education. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337, 59 S.Ct. This would set a precedent for future legal issues about segregation, including the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education a few years later. 851, 94 L.Ed. On the assumption, however, that the State would follow the constitutional mandate, the court refused to grant the injunction, retaining jurisdiction of the cause with full power to issue any necessary and proper orders to secure McLaurin the equal protection of the laws. WebIn McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, McLaurin argued that the Fourteenth Amendment was being violated by how they were being treated. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 339 U.S. 637 (1950). In 1948, McLaurin applied for admission to the doctoral program in the College of Education, directly challenging the states current segregation laws. The litigation in McLaurin began to take shape when George W. McLaurin, an African American student with a masters degree, applied for admission to the University of Oklahoma in pursuit of a doctorate in education but was denied entry solely because of his race. Al. 0000001099 00000 n . A three-judge federal trial court determined that officials in Oklahoma had a constitutional duty to provide the plaintiff with the education he wanted as soon as they offered the same to students of any other race. Do you find this information helpful? McLAURINv.OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, https://www.britannica.com/event/McLaurin-v-Oklahoma-State-Regents, BlackPast - McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, Cornell Law School - Legal Information Institute - McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. McLaurin won the right to attend the University of Oklahoma; however, Oklahoma simply amended its laws to say that while African Americans could attend white institutions, they must be segregated. WebSupreme Court case McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents School ruled that public institutions of higher learning could not discriminate due to race. - Biography, Facts, Quotes & Accomplishments, Working Scholars Bringing Tuition-Free College to the Community. WebMcLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education , legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously (90), on June 5, 1950, that racial segregation within the facilities and institutions of colleges and universities is inconsistent Held: the conditions under which appellant is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws, and the Fourteenth Amendment precludes such differences in treatment by the State based upon race. WebMcLAURIN v. OKLAHOMA STATE REGENTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION et al. (c) Having been admitted to a state-supported graduate school, appellant must receive the same treatment at the hands of the State as students of other races. Chief Justice Fred Vinson, writing for the court, held that the differential treatment given to McLaurin was itself a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause: "Such restrictions impair and inhibit his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." However, the facilities and services used by African Americans were not equal to those of white Americans. Held: The conditions under which appellant is required to receive his education deprive him of his personal and present right to the equal protection of the laws; and the Fourteenth Amendment precludes such differences in treatment by the State based upon race. 851, 94 L.Ed. 0000071802 00000 n These restrictions were obviously imposed in order to comply, as nearly as could be, with the statutory requirements of Oklahoma. Gaines v. Canada, 1938, 305 U.S. 337, 59 S.Ct. xb``c``nb`a`a`@ +s,p*X9 y g`4o@,``PPLJ1lacXq;_ MR endstream endobj 21 0 obj<> endobj 23 0 obj<>/XObject<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageC]/ExtGState<>/Properties<>>>>>>> endobj 24 0 obj<> endobj 25 0 obj<> endobj 26 0 obj<> endobj 27 0 obj<>stream Appellant is a Negro citizen of Oklahoma. Those who will come under his guidance and influence must be directly affected by the education he receives. Appellant was thereupon admitted to the University of Oklahoma Graduate School. McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, 339 U.S. 637. Thus he was required to sit apart at a designated desk in an anteroom adjoining the classroom; to sit at a designated desk on the mezzanine floor of the library, but not to use the desks in the regular reading room; and to sit at a designated table and to eat at a different time from the other students in the school cafeteria. The amendment provided, however, that in such cases the program of instruction "shall be given at such colleges or institutions of higher education upon a segregated basis." McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, an important case leading up to the U.S. Supreme Court's 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education, struck down the Oklahoma statute that mandated It further held that to the extent the Oklahoma statutes denied him admission they were unconstitutional and void. Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1, 13 -14 (1948). The court did not believe that it was Constitutional to integrate different races and social classes. For some time, the section of the classroom in which appellant sat was surrounded by a rail on which there was a sign stating, 'Reserved For Colored,' but these have been removed. his ability to study, to engage in discussions and exchange views with other students, and, in general, to learn his profession." 455. United States District Court W. D. (1950) Henderson v. United States Et. Research: Josh Altic Vojsava Ramaj He may wait in line in the cafeteria and there stand and talk with his fellow students, but while he eats he must remain apart.