All right, you people, now All right, you people, now you are in my area—the you are in my area—the

judicial systemjudicial system. And we. And we’’re re going to learn about the going to learn about the

American System of American System of JusticeJustice

ThatThat’’s right, Judge Judy. s right, Judge Judy. Judge Wapner here. Judge Wapner here. WeWe’’ll start by talking in ll start by talking in general about American general about American courts.courts.

First off, First off, Judges Judges do more than do more than make decisions based on make decisions based on

laws; theylaws; they actually make laws. actually make laws.

When judges announce specific When judges announce specific decisions, they also provide the decisions, they also provide the legal grounds for those decisions.legal grounds for those decisions.Those grounds serve as Those grounds serve as precedents:precedents:guiding principles for determining guiding principles for determining what is legal in future situations what is legal in future situations that involve similar issuesthat involve similar issues. Other . Other judges—and lawyers—use these judges—and lawyers—use these precedents in guiding their actions.precedents in guiding their actions.so, judges by making precedents,so, judges by making precedents,actually make law, with no checks actually make law, with no checks or balances.or balances.

Article III of Article III of thethe ConstitutionConstitution: : ““the judicial the judicial power of the United States shall be vested power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may . . . establish.Courts as the Congress may . . . establish.””

This provision This provision gives the federal courts gives the federal courts their jurisdiction—the authority to interpret their jurisdiction—the authority to interpret and administer the lawand administer the law..

The words of the Constitution are vague.The words of the Constitution are vague.Chief Justice John Marshall provided detailsChief Justice John Marshall provided detailsregarding what the courts mayregarding what the courts maydo with his ruling in the crucial do with his ruling in the crucial case of case of Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison (1803) (1803)

John Adams commissioned John Adams commissioned William Marbury as DC Justice of William Marbury as DC Justice of the Peace. Midnight appointmentthe Peace. Midnight appointmentNew Secretary of State Madison New Secretary of State Madison refused to deliver; Marbury suedrefused to deliver; Marbury suedMarshall Court held: Madison had broken the Marshall Court held: Madison had broken the law but that that part of the Judiciary Act of law but that that part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional because it expanded1789 was unconstitutional because it expanded the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Courtthe original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

MarshallMarshall’’s decision initiated s decision initiated the Courtthe Court’’s power of Judicial s power of Judicial Review—interpreting what the Review—interpreting what the law islaw isNot used again until the Not used again until the decision in decision in Dred Scott vs. Dred Scott vs. SanfordSanford in 1857 and only about in 1857 and only about 150 times since. 150 times since.

Even though the Marshall CourtEven though the Marshall Court’’s decision in s decision in Marbury vs. MadisonMarbury vs. Madison (1803) declared part of (1803) declared part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional,the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional,the structure of todaythe structure of today’’s federal court system s federal court system was established by another part of that law.was established by another part of that law.

Lower federal courts have Lower federal courts have original jurisdictionoriginal jurisdiction: : the authority to hear a casethe authority to hear a case’’s initial trials initial trial. But. Butthe the limits on federal courts are that they may limits on federal courts are that they may only hear cases arising under the Constitution only hear cases arising under the Constitution and other federal lawsand other federal laws, and other related , and other related factors—governments, foreign diplomats, etc.factors—governments, foreign diplomats, etc.

Lower courtsLower courts are divided into are divided into district courts district courts and courts of appealsand courts of appealsDistrict courtsDistrict courts: : trial courtstrial courts in the federal in the federal court system court system

They are assigned to They are assigned to specific geographic areasDistrict courts make District courts make decisionsdecisions in in

disputes disputes based on the law and based on the law and facts presentedfacts presented in the case in the case

Cases are tried before a Cases are tried before a district court judge and jurydistrict court judge and jury..Both sides present Both sides present evidenceevidence,,some of which is supplied by some of which is supplied by witnesseswitnesses. . ProsecutorsProsecutors represent represent the peoplethe people; ; defense defense councilcouncil represent represent defendantsdefendants

Courts of appeals hear Courts of appeals hear appeals of casesappeals of cases that that have been adjudicated have been adjudicated by district courtsby district courts

There are There are 11 U. S. courts of appeals11 U. S. courts of appeals, each of , each of which covers which covers a jurisdiction called a circuita jurisdiction called a circuit..The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals covers the The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals covers the Western region: AK, HI, WA, OR, CA, NV, AZ, Western region: AK, HI, WA, OR, CA, NV, AZ, ID, and MTID, and MTEach circuit court of appeals has Each circuit court of appeals has 6-28 judges6-28 judges No juries; usually only 3 judges hear a caseNo juries; usually only 3 judges hear a case;;however, at times the entire circuit court may however, at times the entire circuit court may hear a case—the Ninth Circuit and the Pledge hear a case—the Ninth Circuit and the Pledge of Allegiance of Allegiance ““Under GodUnder God”” lawsuit lawsuit

Judges base their decisions on two inputsJudges base their decisions on two inputs::written legal briefswritten legal briefs submitted by the submitted by the attorneys from both sides and from attorneys from both sides and from the the written written record from the actual trialrecord from the actual trialOften, attorneysOften, attorneys from from both sidesboth sides may may also also orally argue the caseorally argue the case before a 3-judge before a 3-judge panelpanelThe The judges can reversejudges can reverse the lower courtthe lower court’’s s decisiondecision; ; affirmaffirm (or uphold) (or uphold) the the lower lower courtcourt’’s s decisiondecision; or ; or send the case backsend the case back to the to the lower lower court court for retrialfor retrial. Usually, a . Usually, a reversal reversal will will come come ifif the appeals court finds that the the appeals court finds that the lower lower courtcourt did not properly apply a law.did not properly apply a law.

Students, also understand Students, also understand that that federal judges serve federal judges serve ““for lifefor life..”” My fellow My fellow

FoundersFounders and I and I wantedwanted a system a system where where judgesjudges could remaincould remain independent of independent of political political pressure.pressure.Federal judgesFederal judges are are appointed by the Presidentappointed by the President,,

and and approved by the Senateapproved by the Senate. Through . Through Senatorial CourtesySenatorial Courtesy, , presidents will givepresidents will give senators from their party who live in the senators from their party who live in the region where the judge will serve the courtesy region where the judge will serve the courtesy of reviewing and approving nominationsof reviewing and approving nominations..

The United States Supreme Court The United States Supreme Court

Now, itNow, it’’s our s our turn.turn.

Chief Justice: John Roberts Chief Justice: John Roberts (2005);(2005); John John Paul Stevens Paul Stevens (1975);(1975); Antonin Scalia Antonin Scalia (1986);(1986); Anthony Kennedy Anthony Kennedy (1988), (1988), David SouterDavid Souter (1990)(1990)

Clarence Thomas Clarence Thomas (1991); (1991); Ruth Bader Ruth Bader Ginsburg Ginsburg (1993);(1993); Stephen Breyer Stephen Breyer (1994);(1994); Samuel AlitoSamuel Alito (2006) (2006)

““During good behaviorDuring good behavior”” (or for life) (or for life)

No background requirements:No background requirements: age, profession. But age, profession. But all have had all have had significant preparationsignificant preparation

Constitution does not set size; Constitution does not set size; Congress sets Congress sets the sizethe size. The current number of . The current number of 9 set 18699 set 1869..

Hello, again, students. Hello, again, students. Chief Justice John Chief Justice John Marshall here. Marshall here. How long How long can a Supreme Court can a Supreme Court Justice serveJustice serve, per the , per the Constitution?Constitution?

Appointed by the President; approved by the Appointed by the President; approved by the U. S. SenateU. S. Senate

The The Supreme CourtSupreme Court is is mostly an appeals courtmostly an appeals court, , reviewing cases from reviewing cases from lower federal courtslower federal courts. . About About 12%12% of the cases of the cases we review come we review come from from state courtsstate courts..

Each year, the Each year, the Supreme Court receives Supreme Court receives hundreds of caseshundreds of cases. It . It sets its own agendasets its own agenda bybychoosing to hear caseschoosing to hear cases on public policy on public policy issues issues that it considers the that it considers the most pressingmost pressing. Those. Thosecases are cases are placed on the courtplaced on the court’’s dockets docket (or (or scheduleschedule))

Most people who Most people who petition petition the Supreme the Supreme

Court Court request a request a writ of writ of certioraricertiorari. . IfIf the the Court Court

agreesagrees to hear the to hear the case, it case, it grants a grants a cert cert

under the under the Rule of FourRule of Four—if 4 justices vote to —if 4 justices vote to

hear the case.hear the case.Lawyers who may argue before the Supreme Lawyers who may argue before the Supreme Court must be Court must be members of the Supreme members of the Supreme Court bar—having been a member of a state Court bar—having been a member of a state bar for at least 3 yearsbar for at least 3 years and known to be of and known to be of Good moral and professional character.Good moral and professional character.

For cases we choose to hear For cases we choose to hear (about 140 out of the nearly (about 140 out of the nearly 8,000 cases filed each year), 8,000 cases filed each year),

lawyers for lawyers for each side file each side file written briefs—summaries of written briefs—summaries of

their argumentstheir arguments based on law, based on law, the Constitution, and the Constitution, and

evidence.evidence.If one of the sidesIf one of the sides in a case in a case is the United Statesis the United StatesGovernmentGovernment, , the Solicitor General of the the Solicitor General of the United StatesUnited States, an official of the Department of , an official of the Department of Justice, Justice, files the brieffiles the brief. . GroupGroups who are s who are notnot the the main parties butmain parties but who who have have great interestgreat interest in a case in a case may file may file amicusamicuscuriaecuriae (friend of the court) (friend of the court) briefsbriefs as well as well

After the Court has read the After the Court has read the written briefs, lawyers for both written briefs, lawyers for both sides present sides present oral argumentsoral arguments before the Court. Generally, before the Court. Generally, each side has 30-minuteseach side has 30-minutes to to present its case; however, present its case; however, usually my colleagues and I usually my colleagues and I use use most of that timemost of that time by by asking them to asking them to respondrespond toto our our (the justices(the justices’’)) questions. questions.

After hearing arguments on cases for about After hearing arguments on cases for about three weeks, the members of the Court go into three weeks, the members of the Court go into consideration sessions—they discuss the cases,consideration sessions—they discuss the cases,in order of seniorityin order of seniority, starting with the Chief , starting with the Chief Justice, and Justice, and decide how they will ruledecide how they will rule..

If we are not unanimous, If we are not unanimous, the the senior person on each side senior person on each side of an issue assignsof an issue assigns opinion- opinion-writing writing responsibilitiesresponsibilities..

The majority opinionThe majority opinion——the views of the majority the views of the majority of the court in both the outcome of the case of the court in both the outcome of the case and on the Courtand on the Court’’s grounds for deciding its grounds for deciding it..

Concurring opinions—a justice Concurring opinions—a justice writes one of writes one of thesethese if if he/shehe/she agrees with the majority out- agrees with the majority out-come, but disagrees come, but disagrees with all or part ofwith all or part of the the grounds grounds stated in the majority opinionstated in the majority opinion..

A justice might write a A justice might write a dissenting opiniondissenting opinion ifif he or he or she she disagrees with the disagrees with the decision reached by the decision reached by the majoritymajority. In this document, . In this document, the justice the justice notes the notes the grounds for his or her grounds for his or her dissent.dissent.

TheThe Supreme Court rarely reverses the Supreme Court rarely reverses the decision of an earlier court, decision of an earlier court, placingplacing great great weight on weight on stare decisisstare decisis——or upholding or upholding precedents set by earlier courtsprecedents set by earlier courts. .

There are There are major major differencesdifferences in civil and in civil and criminal casescriminal cases. In a . In a criminal law case, criminal law case, the the peoplepeople, or the prosecutor, , or the prosecutor, must prove guilt beyond a must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubtreasonable doubt, for , for example. But in a example. But in a civil suitcivil suit the the plaintiff does notplaintiff does not have have to prove wrongdoingto prove wrongdoing by by the defendant the defendant beyond a beyond a reasonable doubtreasonable doubt. . ThatThat’’s why I walked away s why I walked away

acquitted of murder in 1996, acquitted of murder in 1996, but in the civil suit brought by but in the civil suit brought by

Fred Goldman and others I Fred Goldman and others I lost almost everything.lost almost everything.

Since the decision of Since the decision of the Marshall Court in the Marshall Court in Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison

(1803) Supreme (1803) Supreme Courts have made Courts have made

thousands of thousands of decisions. Some of decisions. Some of

them, however, have them, however, have been so important, been so important,

that they are that they are considered considered landmarklandmark—or very important--—or very important--

decisionsdecisions. In this . In this short class we shall short class we shall

discuss some of those discuss some of those landmark decisions.landmark decisions.

Good evening Good evening Columbians. I was Columbians. I was Chief Justice Earl Chief Justice Earl Warren. Our first Warren. Our first case was a multi-case was a multi-amendment case amendment case (with emphasis on (with emphasis on

the First the First Amendment) that my Amendment) that my

court, the Warren court, the Warren Court, decided:Court, decided:

Griswold v. Griswold v. ConnecticutConnecticut (1965). (1965). AA Connecticut law criminalized counseling Connecticut law criminalized counseling

married couples about married couples about or giving married or giving married couples medical treatment for the purposes couples medical treatment for the purposes ofof preventing conception of a child. preventing conception of a child.

Griswold v. ConnecticutGriswold v. Connecticut (1965) (1965)

Issue: Does the Constitution protect the Issue: Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couplerestrictions on a couple’’s ability to be s ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives? counseled in the use of contraceptives? The Court held: together the First, Third,The Court held: together the First, Third,Fourth and Ninth Amendments create the Fourth and Ninth Amendments create the right to privacy among married people.right to privacy among married people.

The Connecticut law was therefore The Connecticut law was therefore unconstitutional and rendered null and unconstitutional and rendered null and void. void.

In 1958 aIn 1958 a Virginia law was Virginia law was inineffect thateffect that banned interracial banned interracial marriages. Two residents of marriages. Two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, an Virginia, Mildred Jeter, an African-American woman and African-American woman and Richard Loving, a white male, Richard Loving, a white male, were married in Washington, D. C., and were married in Washington, D. C., and shortly after returned to Virginia. They were shortly after returned to Virginia. They were charged with violating the Virginia law, found charged with violating the Virginia law, found guilty and sentenced each to a year in jail.guilty and sentenced each to a year in jail.

Yet another case that the Yet another case that the Warren Court, decided, Warren Court, decided,

similar in many respects to similar in many respects to Griswold v. ConnecticutGriswold v. Connecticut

(1965) was(1965) was Loving v. Loving v. VirginiaVirginia (1967.) (1967.)

Loving v. Virginia Loving v. Virginia (1967) (1967) Issue: Did VirginiaIssue: Did Virginia’’s anti-miscegenation law s anti-miscegenation law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Fourteenth Amendment? In a unanimous decision, the Court held: that In a unanimous decision, the Court held: that distinctions drawn according to race were distinctions drawn according to race were generally generally ““odious to a free peopleodious to a free people”” and were and were subject to subject to ““the most rigid scrutinythe most rigid scrutiny”” under the under the Equal Protection Clause. The Virginia law hadEqual Protection Clause. The Virginia law hadno legitimate purpose no legitimate purpose ““independent of independent of invidious racial discrimination.invidious racial discrimination.”” The Court The Court further rejected Virginiafurther rejected Virginia’’s argument that the s argument that the statute was legitimate because it applied statute was legitimate because it applied equally to blacks and whites. equally to blacks and whites.

Columbians, I was Chief Columbians, I was Chief Justice Warren Burger. Justice Warren Burger. We will now discuss one We will now discuss one of my Courtof my Court’’s landmark s landmark

decisions in a case decisions in a case regarding the Fourteenth regarding the Fourteenth

Amendment:Amendment: Roe v. WadeRoe v. Wade (1973) (1973)Norma McCorvey (Roe), a Texas resident, Norma McCorvey (Roe), a Texas resident,

sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion,sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion,because the pregnancy was the result of rapebecause the pregnancy was the result of rape..Texas law prohibited abortions except to save a Texas law prohibited abortions except to save a pregnant womanpregnant woman’’s lifes life. Roe sued claiming . Roe sued claiming that the Texas law violated the Fourteenth that the Texas law violated the Fourteenth Amendment. Amendment.

Roe v. Wade Roe v. Wade (1973) (1973)

Issue: Does the Constitution embrace a Issue: Does the Constitution embrace a womanwoman’’s right to terminate her pregnancy s right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion?by abortion?

The The BurgerBurger Court held: a woman Court held: a woman’’s right s right to an abortion fell within the right to to an abortion fell within the right to privacy privacy ((Griswold v. Connecticut--Griswold v. Connecticut--1965)1965) protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a The decision gave a woman total woman total autonomy over her pregnancyautonomy over her pregnancy during the during the first trimesterfirst trimester. .

Now we are going to Now we are going to discuss 4 cases that discuss 4 cases that primarily pertain to primarily pertain to

the rights of the the rights of the accused in criminal accused in criminal

cases. The first case cases. The first case isis Mapp v. OhioMapp v. Ohio

(1961)(1961)While searching her home for a fugitive, While searching her home for a fugitive, Ohio police discovered obscene materialsOhio police discovered obscene materials in Dolree Mappin Dolree Mapp’’s possession. The police s possession. The police admitted that the search of the home foradmitted that the search of the home forthe fugitive violated the Fourth the fugitive violated the Fourth Amendment. Still, Mapp was convicted of Amendment. Still, Mapp was convicted of possessing obscene materials.possessing obscene materials.

Mapp v. OhioMapp v. Ohio (1961) (1961) Issues:Issues: 1) Were the confiscated materials 1) Were the confiscated materials protected by the First Amendment? protected by the First Amendment? 2) May evidence obtained in a search 2) May evidence obtained in a search that violated the Fourth Amendment that violated the Fourth Amendment be used in a state court? be used in a state court?

The Court held: all evidence obtained The Court held: all evidence obtained through illegal searches and seizures is through illegal searches and seizures is inadmissible inadmissible in state courtin state court. . This decisionThis decision created the exclusionary rule, created the exclusionary rule, placing on placing on all levels of government the requirement all levels of government the requirement ofof excluding illegally obtained evidence excluding illegally obtained evidence from all criminal from all criminal court proceedings. court proceedings.

Our next case Our next case concerns the Sixth concerns the Sixth

and Fourteenth and Fourteenth Amendments; Amendments;

specifically the right specifically the right to counsel:to counsel: Gideon v. Gideon v.

WainwrightWainwright (1963) (1963)

GideonGideon was arrested in was arrested in FloridaFlorida and and charged with felony breaking and charged with felony breaking and entering. He lacked funds to hire a entering. He lacked funds to hire a lawyer and lawyer and requested a court-appointed requested a court-appointed lawyer. lawyer. The The judge refusedjudge refused; Gideon ; Gideon defended himself, was convicted, and defended himself, was convicted, and sentenced to 5 years in state prison. sentenced to 5 years in state prison.

Gideon v. WainwrightGideon v. Wainwright (1963) (1963)

Issue: Do the Sixth and Fourteenth Issue: Do the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee a right to legal Amendments guarantee a right to legal counsel in all cases?counsel in all cases?

The court held: Gideon had a right to The court held: Gideon had a right to be represented by a court-appointed be represented by a court-appointed attorney. attorney. Overruled Overruled Betts v. BradyBetts v. Brady (1942). (1942). Justice Black: Justice Black: ““an obvious truthan obvious truth”” that a that a fair trial fair trial for a poor defendant requires afor a poor defendant requires acompetent legal competent legal counsel.counsel. ““Lawyers Lawyers are a necessity, not are a necessity, not a luxury.a luxury.””

Another landmark Another landmark decision dealing with decision dealing with

the right of an accused the right of an accused person to an attorney person to an attorney

was the was the 1964 1964 decision, decision, Escobedo v. IllinoisEscobedo v. Illinois..

Escobedo was arrested in connection with Escobedo was arrested in connection with a murder and, during interrogation at a a murder and, during interrogation at a local police station, the police denied himlocal police station, the police denied himaccess to his attorney. Without his lawyer access to his attorney. Without his lawyer present, he confessed to firing the shot present, he confessed to firing the shot that killed the victim and, based on that that killed the victim and, based on that confession, was convicted.confession, was convicted.

Escobedo v. IllinoisEscobedo v. Illinois (1964)(1964)Issue: Is an accused person entitled Issue: Is an accused person entitled to to have an attorney present during have an attorney present during questioning.?questioning.?The The WarrenWarren Court held: based on the Court held: based on the ““exclusionary ruleexclusionary rule”” from from Mapp v. OhioMapp v. Ohio (1961),(1961), the police obtained Escobedo the police obtained Escobedo’’s s confession in an illegal manner. His confession in an illegal manner. His conviction was overturned. conviction was overturned. The Court The Court also created the Escobedo Rule: based also created the Escobedo Rule: based on the Sixth Amendment,on the Sixth Amendment, police must police must warn an accused of the rights to remain warn an accused of the rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present silent and to have an attorney present during questioning.during questioning.

Columbians, Elle here. Columbians, Elle here. Our next case is one of Our next case is one of

the most famous in the most famous in American history. It American history. It

involves the Fifth involves the Fifth AmendmentAmendment: : Miranda v. Miranda v.

ArizonaArizona (1966) (1966) Miranda was arrested in Arizona Miranda was arrested in Arizona and the police questioned him and the police questioned him without advising him of his without advising him of his constitutional rights under the constitutional rights under the Fifth Amendment (self-Fifth Amendment (self-incrimination.) He confessed to incrimination.) He confessed to part of the crime. His confession part of the crime. His confession was used in court and he was was used in court and he was convicted, based, in part, on his convicted, based, in part, on his confession.confession.

Miranda v. Arizona Miranda v. Arizona (1966) (1966) Issue: Did the police practice of Issue: Did the police practice of interrogating individuals without interrogating individuals without advising them of their right to counsel advising them of their right to counsel and protection against self-incrimination and protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment? violate the Fifth Amendment?

The Court held: Prosecutors could not The Court held: Prosecutors could not use use statements statements in court that had beenin court that had been made by made by defendants unless police had advised defendants unless police had advised them them of their privilege against self-of their privilege against self-incrimination. incrimination. The Court also The Court also specifically outlined what police specifically outlined what police warnings to suspects must include warnings to suspects must include (right to remain silent, right to counsel (right to remain silent, right to counsel present during questioning, etc.)present during questioning, etc.)

In In 18961896 the the Court ruled, in Court ruled, in Plessy v. FergusonPlessy v. Ferguson, , that Blacks could be that Blacks could be placed in separate placed in separate facilities if they werefacilities if they were““equalequal”” to those used to those usedby whites. Schoolby whites. Schooldistricts therefore districts therefore created created separate separate ““but equalbut equal”” schools schools

I was Justice Thurgood I was Justice Thurgood Marshall. When I was Marshall. When I was an attorney, I argued, an attorney, I argued, and won, the single and won, the single

most important most important Supreme Court case Supreme Court case regarding civil rights:regarding civil rights:

Brown v. Board of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Education of Topeka,

KSKS (1954). (1954).

Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. Board of Education (1954)(1954)An African-American girl named Linda An African-American girl named Linda Brown lived near an all-white school in Brown lived near an all-white school in Topeka, KS. To get to her all-black school,Topeka, KS. To get to her all-black school,she had to cross several dangerous roads she had to cross several dangerous roads and railroads. Her father, Oliver Brown,and railroads. Her father, Oliver Brown,filed suit to overturn filed suit to overturn Plessy v. FergusonPlessy v. Ferguson to to enable Linda Brown to attend the all-white enable Linda Brown to attend the all-white school near her home.school near her home.

Issue: Did the Issue: Did the ““separate but equalseparate but equal”” provision of provision of Plessy v. Plessy v. FergusonFerguson violate the equal protection violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. Board of Education (1954)(1954)The Warren Court held: The Warren Court held: Plessy Plessy v. Fergusonv. Ferguson’’ss ““separate but separate but equal ruleequal rule”” was was a violation of the a violation of theFourteenth Amendment. Fourteenth Amendment. RacialRacialsegregation in public educationsegregation in public education““has a detrimental effect onhas a detrimental effect onminority children because it isminority children because it isinterpreted as a sign of inferiority.interpreted as a sign of inferiority.””Result: beginning of the end of all forms Result: beginning of the end of all forms of state-maintained racial segregation.of state-maintained racial segregation.