McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education

Chief Justice Vinson delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court, which ruled that the University of Oklahoma's treatment of McLaurin, even in its modified form, was unconstitutional and must be stopped. Vinson had a strong personal interest in civil rights cases, and worked tirelessly behind the scenes to insure unanimity in the decision so as not to dilute the message he believed the Court should send to society. The Court was careful to point out that it was only ruling on the narrow question of "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." However, the Court was also willing to face the wider implications of its decision.

Our society grows increasingly complex, and our need for trained leaders increases correspondingly. Appellant's case represents, perhaps, the epitome of that need, for he is attempting to obtain an advanced degree in education, to become, by definition, a leader and trainer of others.

The Court thus ruled that separate but equal facilities worked against the national interest, and strongly implied that they would no longer be tolerated in the field of education.