I 
108TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 4162 
To posthumously award a congressional gold medal to the Reverend Oliver 
L. Brown. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
APRIL 2, 2004 
Mr. RYUN of Kansas (for himself, Mr. FATTAH, Mrs. JONES of Ohio, Ms. 
DELAURO, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Ms. LEE, Mr. CRANE, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. 
KILPATRICK, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. OWENS, Mr. THOMP-
SON of Mississippi, Mr. CONYERS, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Mr. 
MEEK of Florida, Mrs. CHRISTENSEN, Mr. TOWNS, Ms. CARSON of Indi-
ana, Ms. WATERS, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. 
WAMP, Mr. HAYWORTH, Mr. TERRY, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. 
FOLEY, Mr. KELLER, Mr. KINGSTON, and Mr. DAVIS of Illinois) intro-
duced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Finan-
cial Services 
A BILL 
To posthumously award a congressional gold medal to the 
Reverend Oliver L. Brown. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reverend Oliver L. 
Brown Congressional Gold Medal Act’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
The Congress finds that— 
(1) Oliver L. Brown is the namesake of the 
landmark United States Supreme Court decision of 
1954, Brown v. Board of Education (347 U.S. 483, 
1954); 
(2) Oliver L. Brown is honored as the lead 
plaintiff in the Topeka, Kansas case which posed a 
legal challenge to racial segregation in public edu-
cation; 
(3) by 1950, African-American parents began 
to renew their efforts to challenge State laws that 
only permitted their children to attend certain 
schools, and as a result, they organized through the 
National Association for the Advancement of Col-
ored People (the NAACP), an organization founded 
in 1909 to address the issue of the unequal and dis-
criminatory treatment experienced by African-Ameri-
cans throughout the country; 
(4) Oliver L. Brown became part of the 
NAACP strategy led first by Charles Houston and 
later by Thurgood Marshall, to file suit against var-
ious school boards on behalf of such parents and 
their children; 
(5) Oliver L. Brown was a member of a distin-
guished group of plaintiffs in cases from Kansas
(Brown v. Board of Education), Delaware (Gebhart 
v. Belton), South Carolina (Briggs v. Elliot), and 
Virginia (Davis v. County School Board of Prince 
Edward County) that were combined by the United 
States Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Edu-
cation, and in Washington, D.C. (Bolling v. Sharpe), 
considered separately by the Supreme Court with re-
spect to the District of Columbia; 
(6) with respect to cases filed in the State of 
Kansas— 
(A) there were 11 school integration cases 
dating from 1881 to 1949, prior to Brown v. 
Board of Education in 1954; 
(B) in many instances, the schools for Af-
rican-American children were substandard fa-
cilities with out-of-date textbooks and often no 
basic school supplies; 
(C) in the fall of 1950, members of the To-
peka, Kansas chapter of the NAACP agreed to 
again challenge the ‘‘separate but equal’’ doc-
trine governing public education; 
(D) on February 28, 1951, the NAACP 
filed their case as Oliver L. Brown et al. v. The 
Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (which
represented a group of 13 parents and 20 chil-
dren); 
(E) the district court ruled in favor of the 
school board and the case was appealed to the 
United States Supreme Court; 
(F) at the Supreme Court level, the case 
was combined with other NAACP cases from 
Delaware, South Carolina, Virginia, and Wash-
ington, D.C. (which was later heard separately); 
and 
(G) the combined cases became known as 
Oliver L. Brown et al. v. The Board of Edu-
cation of Topeka, et al.; 
(7) with respect to the Virginia case of Davis 
et al. v. Prince Edward County Board of Super-
visors— 
(A) one of the few public high schools 
available to African-Americans in the State of 
Virginia was Robert Moton High School in 
Prince Edward County; 
(B) built in 1943, it was never large 
enough to accommodate its student population; 
(C) the gross inadequacies of these class-
rooms sparked a student strike in 1951;
(D) the NAACP soon joined their strug-
gles and challenged the inferior quality of their 
school facilities in court; and 
(E) although the United States District 
Court ordered that the plaintiffs be provided 
with equal school facilities, they were denied ac-
cess to the schools for white students in their 
area; 
(8) with respect to the South Carolina case of 
Briggs v. R.W. Elliott— 
(A) in Clarendon County, South Carolina, 
the State NAACP first attempted, unsuccess-
fully and with a single plaintiff, to take legal 
action in 1947 against the inferior conditions 
that African-American students experienced 
under South Carolina’s racially segregated 
school system; 
(B) by 1951, community activists con-
vinced African-American parents to join the 
NAACP efforts to file a class action suit in 
United States District Court; 
(C) the court found that the schools des-
ignated for African-Americans were grossly in-
adequate in terms of buildings, transportation,
(10) with respect to the District of Columbia 
case of Bolling, et al. v. C. Melvin Sharpe, et al.— 
(A) 11 African-American junior high 
school students were taken on a field trip to 
Washington, D.C.’s new John Philip Sousa 
School for white students only; 
(B) the African-American students were 
denied admittance to the school and ordered to 
return to their inadequate school; and 
(C) in 1951, a suit was filed on behalf of 
the students, and after review with the Brown 
case in 1954, the United States Supreme Court 
ruled that segregation in the Nation’s capital 
was unconstitutional; 
(11) on May 17, 1954, at 12:52 p.m., the 
United States Supreme Court ruled that the dis-
criminatory nature of racial segregation ‘‘violates the 
14th Amendment to the Constitution, which guaran-
tees all citizens equal protection of the laws’’; 
(12) the decision in Brown v. Board of Edu-
cation set the stage for dismantling racial segrega-
tion throughout the country; 
(13) the quiet courage of Oliver L. Brown and 
his fellow plaintiffs asserted the right of African-
American people to have equal access to social, polit-
ical, and communal structures; 
(14) our country is indebted to the work of the 
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., 
Howard University Law School, the NAACP, and 
the individual plaintiffs in the cases considered by 
the Supreme Court; 
(15) Reverend Oliver L. Brown died in 1961, 
and because the landmark United States Supreme 
Court decision bears his name, he is remembered as 
an icon for justice, freedom, and equal rights; and 
(16) the national importance of the Brown v. 
Board of Education decision had a profound impact 
on American culture, affecting families, commu-
nities, and governments by outlawing racial segrega-
tion in public education, resulting in the abolition of 
legal discrimination on any basis. 
SEC. 3. CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL. 
(a) PRESENTATION AUTHORIZED.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the President pro tempore of 
the Senate shall make appropriate arrangements for 
the posthumous presentation, on behalf of the Con-
gress, of a gold medal of appropriate design in com-
memoration of the Reverend Oliver L. Brown, in
recognition of his and his fellow plaintiffs’ enduring 
contributions to civil rights and American society. 
(2) DISPLAY.—The medal presented under 
paragraph (1) shall be maintained and displayed at 
the Brown Foundation of Topeka, Kansas. 
(b) DESIGN AND STRIKING.—For purposes of the 
presentation referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary 
of the Treasury (hereafter in this Act referred to as the 
‘‘Secretary’’) shall strike a gold medal with suitable em-
blems, devices, and inscriptions, to be determined by the 
Secretary. 
SEC. 4. DUPLICATE MEDALS. 
The Secretary may strike and sell duplicates in 
bronze of the gold medal struck pursuant to section 3, 
under such regulations as the Secretary may prescribe, at 
a price sufficient to cover the cost thereof, including labor, 
materials, dies, use of machinery, and overhead expenses, 
and the cost of the gold medal. 
SEC. 5. STATUS OF MEDALS. 
(a) NATIONAL MEDALS.—The medals struck pursu-
ant to this Act are national medals for purposes of chapter 
51 of title 31, United States Code. 
(b) NUMISMATIC ITEMS.—For purposes of section 
5134 of title 31, United States Code, all medals struck 
under this Act shall be considered to be numismatic items.
SEC. 6. AUTHORITY TO USE FUND AMOUNTS; PROCEEDS OF 
SALE. 
(a) AUTHORITY TO USE FUND AMOUNTS.—There is 
authorized to be charged against the United States Mint 
Public Enterprise Fund, such amounts as may be nec-
essary to pay for the costs of the medals struck pursuant 
to this Act. 
(b) PROCEEDS OF SALE.—Amounts received from the 
sale of duplicate bronze medals authorized under section 
4 shall be deposited into the United States Mint Public 
Enterprise Fund. 
Æ