| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Bolling v. Sharpe ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Bolling v. Sharpe
(詳細はU.S. 497 (1954), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case which deals with civil rights, specifically, segregation in the District of Columbia's public schools. Originally argued on December 10–11, 1952, a year before ''Brown v. Board of Education'', 347 U.S. 483 (1954), ''Bolling'' was reargued on December 8 and 9, 1953, and was unanimously decided on May 17, 1954, the same day as ''Brown.'' The ''Bolling'' decision was supplemented in 1955 with the second ''Brown'' opinion, which ordered desegregation "with all deliberate speed." ''Bolling'' did not address school desegregation in the context of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, which applies only to the states, but held that school segregation was unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In ''Bolling,'' the Court observed that the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution lacked an Equal Protection Clause, as in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court held, however, that the concepts of Equal Protection and Due Process are not mutually exclusive.
==Background==
Beginning in late 1949, a group of parents from the Anacostia neighborhood of Washington, DC, calling themselves the Consolidated Parents Group, petitioned the Board of Education of the District of Columbia to open the nearly completed John Phillip Sousa Junior High as an integrated school. The school board denied the petition and the school opened, admitting only whites. On September 11, 1950, Gardner Bishop, Nicholas Stabile and the Consolidated Parents Group attempted to get eleven African-American students (including the case's plaintiff, Spottswood Bolling) admitted to the school, but were refused entry by the school's principal.
James Nabrit, a professor of law at the historically black Howard University, filed suit on behalf of Bolling and the other students in the District Court for the District of Columbia seeking assistance in the students' admission. When the court dismissed the claim, the case was granted a writ of certiorari by the Supreme Court. While Nabrit's argument in ''Bolling'' rested on the unconstitutionality of segregation, the much more famous ''Brown v. Board of Education'' (decided on the same day) argued that the idea of 'separate but equal' facilities sanctioned by ''Plessy v. Ferguson'', 163 U.S. 537 (1896) was a fallacy as the facilities for black students were woefully inadequate. The lead attorney for Bolling was George Edward Chalmer Hayes.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Bolling v. Sharpe」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|