Document: 339 U.S. 629 70 S.Ct. 848 94 L.Ed. 1114 SWEATTv.PAINTER et al. No. 44. Argued April 4, 1950. Decided June 5, Rehearing Denied Oct. 9, See 71 13. Messrs. W. J. Durham, Dallas, Tex., Thurgood Marshall, New York City, for petitioner. Price Daniel, Liberty, Joe R. Greenhill, Houston, respondents. [Argument of Counsel from page 630 intentionally omitted] Mr. Chief Justice VINSON delivered the opinion Court. 1 This case and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents, 637, 851, present different aspects this general question: To what extent does Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment limit power a state to distinguish between students races in professional graduate education university? Broader issues have been urged our consideration, but we adhere principle deciding constitutional questions only context particular before We frequently reiterated that Court will decide when necessary disposition at hand, such decisions be drawn as narrowly possible. Rescue Army Municipal Court, 1947, 331 549, 67 1409, 91 1666, cases cited therein. Because traditional reluctance extend interpretations situations or facts which are not much excellent research detailed argument presented these is unnecessary their disposition. 2 In instant case, petitioner filed an application admission University Texas Law School February, 1946 term. His was rejected solely because he Negro.1 Petitioner thereupon brought suit mandamus against appropriate school officials, respondents here, compel his admission. At time, there no law admitted Negroes. 3 The trial court recognized action denying opportunity gain legal while granting it others deprived him equal protection laws guaranteed by Amendment. did grant relief requested, however, continued six months allow supply substantially facilities. expiration months, December, 1946, denied writ on showing authorized university officials had adopted order calling opening Negroes following February. While petitioner's appeal pending, made available, refused register Civil Appeals set aside court's judgment ordered cause 'remanded generally further proceedings without prejudice rights any party suit.' 4 On remand, hearing held issue equality educational facilities newly established compared with School. Finding new offered 'privileges, advantages, opportunities study equivalent those white Texas,' mandamus. affirmed. 1948, 210 S.W.2d 442. Petitioner's error Supreme granted certiorari, 1949, 338 865, 139, manifest importance involved. 5 School, excluded, staffed faculty sixteen full-time three part-time professors, some whom nationally authorities field. Its student body numbered 850. library contained over 65,000 volumes. Among other available were review, moot facilities, scholarship funds, Order Coif affiliation. school's alumni occupy most distinguished positions private practice public life State. It may properly considered one nation's ranking schools. 6 opened would independent library. teaching carried four members faculty, who maintain offices both institutions. Few 10,000 volumes arrived;2 nor librarian. lacked accreditation. 7 Since report apparently road full has five professors; 23; 16,500 serviced staff; aid association; alumnus become member Bar. 8 Whether original Negroes, cannot find substantial Negro terms number variety courses specialization, size body, scope library, availability review similar activities, superior. What more important, possesses far greater degree qualities incapable objective measurement make greatness school. Such qualities, name few, include reputation experience administration, position influence alumni, standing communicty, traditions prestige. difficult believe free choice schools consider question close. 9 Moreover, although highly learned profession, well aware intensely practical one. school, proving ground learning practice, effective isolation individuals institutions interacts. practiced choose academic vacuum, removed interplay ideas exchange views concerned. willing admit excludes its racial groups 85% population lawyers, witnesses, jurors, judges inevitably dealing becomes With significant segment society conclude receive if 10 argued excluding contention overlooks realities. unlikely group so decisively majority, attending rich prestige history consistently maintained excellence could command, claim afforded unequal open That claim, made, dishonored State, answer. 'Equal achieved through indiscriminate imposition inequalities.' Shelley Kraemer, 334 1, 22, 68 836, 846, 92 1161, A.L.R.2d 441. 11 fundamental concern personal present. stated unanimously 'The must provide (legal education) (petitioner) conformity clause soon applicants group.' Sipuel Board 332 631, 633, 299, 247. 'did whether might satisfy establishing separate Negroes.' Fisher Hurst, 333 147, 150, 389, 390, 604. Missouri ex rel. Gaines Canada, 1938, 305 337, 351, 59 232, 237, 83 208, speaking Hughes, declared 'petitioner's right individual entitled laws, bound furnish within borders persons race, sought same opportunity.' These validity race distinctions state-supported education. 12 accordance cases, right: races. cannot, therefore, agree doctrine Plessy Ferguson, 1896, 163 537, 16 1138, 41 256, requires affirmance below. Nor need reach Ferguson should reexamined light contemporary knowledge respecting purposes effects segregation. supra, 849. 13 hold reversed remanded inconsistent opinion. 14 Reversed. appears restricted students, law. Tex.Const. Art. VII, §§ 7, 14; Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat. Arts. 2643b, 2719, 2900 (Vernon, 1925 Supp.) 'Students interim (located Austin, whereas permanent located Houston) shall use Library Capitol Building * *.' Tex.Laws c. 29, § 11, Supp.), note 2643b. clear privilege anything than extended all citizens

Category: 1