Edwin Washington Project

EWP 1 School Briefing 004

Item

Title

EWP 1 School Briefing 004

Place

Virginia

Identifier

1000497

Is Version Of

1000497_EWP_School_Briefing_004.jpg

Is Part Of

Uncategorized

Date Created

2024-01-07

Format

Jpeg Image

Number

8822f2098d50f48e4410177317f8cc9cf546747491619ce72c5e3c64eb324c1a

Source

/Volumes/T7 Shield/EWP/Elements/EWP_Files/Access Files/Upload temp/1000497_EWP_School_Briefing_004.jpg

Publisher

Digitized by Edwin Washington Project

Rights

Loudoun County Public Schools

Language

English

Replaces

/Volumes/T7 Shield/EWP/Elements/EWP_Files/source/Ingest One/1 Civil Rights/integration_folder/Constitutional_Convention/EWP_School_Briefing_004.jpg

extracted text

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Office of
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Richmond



May 27, 1954

Honorable Blake T. Newton, President,
State Board of Education,
Hague, Virginia.

My dear Mr. Newton:

The State Board of Education at its session on this date propounded
the following inquiry upon which it has requested my opinion:

In view of the opinion handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States
on May 17 in the case of Dorothy E. Davis, et al., Appellants, -v- County School
Board of Prince Edward County, Virginia, et al., what is the legal vitality and
efficacy of section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia, and the statute enacted
pursuant thereto, providing,-in substance, that white and colored children shall
not be taught in the same schoolf

I am sure the Board is familiar with the opinion of the Suprems Court in .
this case. In its opinion, the Court said:

"We conclude that in the field of public education the
doctrine of %separate but equal? has no place. Separate
educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we
hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom
the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation
complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws
guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. ¥ # 3#n

As an integral part of the Court's conclusion, the follofiing language was
employed: .

"Because these are class actions, bacause of the wide applicability
of this decision, and because of the great variety of local
conditions, the formulation of decrees in these cases presents
problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the considera-

5 tion of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the
primary question - the constitutionality of segregation in public

. education. We have now announced that such segregation is a denial
of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we may have the
full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, the cases will
be restored to the docket, and the parties are requested to present
further argument on questions 4 and 5 previously propounded by the :
Court for the reargument this term. ¥ 3 #n '

G

: Question 4 referred to by the Court is as follows:

"Assuming it is decided that segregation in public schools violates
the Fourteenth Amendment


Item sets

EWP 01 Civil Rights