Brief for Appellants in Nos. 2 (1,) and 3 and for Respondents in No. on Further Reargument (5 )
Questions 4 and 5, left undecided and now the subject of discussion in this brief, follow:
- 4. Assuming it is decided that segregation in public schools violates the Fourteenth Amendment
- would a decree necessarily follow providing that, within the limits set by normal geographic school districting, Negro children should forthwith be admitted to schools of their choice, or
- may this Court, in the exercise of its equity powers, permit an effective gradual adjustment to be brought about from existing segregated systems to a system not based on color distinctions?
- 5. On the assumption on which question 4 (a) and (b) are based, and assuming further that this Court will exercise its equity powers to the end described in question 4 (b)
- should this Court formulate detailed decrees in these cases;
- if so, what specific issues should the decrees reach;
- should this Court appoint a special master to hear evidence with a view to recommending specific terms for such decrees;
- should this Court remand to the courts of first instance with directions to frame decrees in these cases, and if so, what general directions should the decrees of this Court include and what procedures should the courts of first instance follow in arriving at the specific terms of more detailed decrees?
- Brief for Appellants in Nos. 2 (1,) and 3 and for Respondents in No. on Further Reargument (5 ) - Developments In These Cases Since The Last Argument
- Brief for Appellants in Nos. 2 (1,) and 3 and for Respondents in No. on Further Reargument (5 ) - Preliminary Statement
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1954 to 1962Brief for Appellants in Nos. 2 (1,) and 3 and for Respondents in No. on Further Reargument (5 ) - In The Supreme Court Of The United States October Term, 1954, Appeals From The United States District Courts For The District Of Kansas, The Eastern District