Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka

of Education together to form by the action around a wide range of call... 布朗诉托皮卡教育局案 其实是由发生于各地的 多件诉讼共同组成的一 个广泛称呼
The fact that apartheid measures ofte n segregation and inequality poor. 事实上种族隔离措施常常“隔离且不 平等”
相当巨大的，影响层面 不只有在教育方面，随 后有许多黑人都对于不 公平的种族隔离措施提 起诉讼，并且引用本案 作为理由，常常获得胜 诉。本案判决确实对于 黑人争取废除种族隔离 有巨大的帮助。
图中显示第101空降师护
送九名黑人学童前往小 岩城中央中学就读的情 形
Have a drinking
water faucet, set up under the Jim Crow laws in the figure next to hanging asign reading "colored only". 图中有一个根据吉姆· 克劳 法设立的饮用水龙头，旁 边挂著一块牌子写着“有 色人种专用”。
出种族隔离的教育措施 违宪必须终止，因此美 国各地的中小学自此以 后种族隔离的现象不再 继续存在；
In addition, because the
另外，由于本案的法律
principles of law in this case later in his case also expansion applicable, thus affecting the level also extend to university education, the original policy of apartheid in American universities and therefore be interpreted as unconstitutional.
布理格斯诉伊利奥特案Fabrice Rodriguez v. Elliott case
戴维斯诉普林斯· 爱德华郡教育局案Davis v. Prince Edward County Board of Education
贝尔顿诉格布哈特案Belton v. Gebhard case
波林诉夏普案Pollin v. Sharp case
By:
Brown v. Board of
Education of Topeka is one of the most historic cases in the constitutionalism history trailed by the Supreme Court.“布朗案” 是在美国宪政史上联邦 最高法院审理的最有历 史意义的案件之一，对 于公民受教育权的促进 有着特殊的意义。
原则后来在他案也同样 扩张适用，因此影响层 面也扩及至大学教育， 美国的大学中原本存在 的种族隔离政策也因此 被解释为违宪。
However, the Supreme
Hale Waihona Puke Baidu
Court's decision did not expressly stipulate the measures that must be completed during the restriction period, and throughout the United States (especially the South) and varying degrees of "resistance" in order to delay the completion of the primary and secondary measures of racial integration.
• 种族隔离的教育措施是否剥夺了黑人学童的权利（因而违反同等保护 权）？如果是，究竟这样的措施剥夺了哪些权利？
Since the original intent of the Framers could not be included in the considerations, to solve the case problem Why? The problem where the point?
然而，最高法院的判决
并未明确订定措施必须 完成的限制期间，因此 在美国各地（特别是南 方）出现了不同程度的 “抗争”，藉以拖延中 小学中种族融合措施的 完成
The figure shows the
case to the 101st Airborne Division to escort nine black children t oattend Little Rock Central High School
• 为了厘清第十四条修正案同等保护权的适用范围究竟有没有涵盖公 立教育的问题，法院对于第十四条修正案需不需要采历史解释？亦 即，第十四条修正案形成时，制宪者的原意（framers' intent）是 否重要？制宪者的原意可否适用在本案？
Actively coordinate in this case Justice Earl Warren's opini on in this case can be said that in the future to improve the racial inequality in the United States c ontributions to the extraordinary. 在本案中积极协调各个大法官 的厄尔· 沃伦在本案中的见解， 日后对改善美国的种族不平等 可以说是贡献不凡。
From the
above argument, the Court of judgments isolation but equal "legal principles in the public elementary and secondary schools, because the measures of isolatio n itself is kind of inequality (inherently unequal), it is no longer applicable . Segregated education violated the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection rights "and therefore unconstitutional, the law and therefore does not apply to cases, black children into whit e schools, the right shall not be denied.
Supreme Court's
最高法院的判决明确指
decision is clear that the educational measures unconstitutional racial segregation must end, and throughout the United States primary and secondary schools since the phenomenon of apartheid no longer continue to exist
• 既然制宪者的原意无法列入考量因素，解决本案问题的 方法究竟为何？问题点在哪里？
In order to clarify the Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection of the scope of application covering public education, the court explained the need mining history of the Fourteenth Amendment? That is, the formation of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Framersintended (framers' intent) is important? The original intent of the Framers could be applied in this case?
The Supreme Court referred to the following
The essence of education in modern society and what? • 现代社会中教育的本质及其功能为何？ Apartheid education measures are deprived of the rights of black children (and thusviolated the equal protection rights)? If yes, whether such a measure deprived of theirrights?
从以上几点论证，法院因
此判决“隔离但平等”的 法律原则，在公立中小学 中，因为隔离的措施本身 即是一种不平等 （inherently unequal）， 因此不再适用。隔离教育 违反了第十四条修正案的 “同等保护权”，因此违 宪，法律因而不适用于个 案中，黑人学童进入白人 学校就读的权利不得被拒 绝[32]。
Dred Scott in 1846 to fight for their own freedom lawsuit contended that he had lived in the Free State 德雷德· 斯科特（英语：Dred Scott） 为了争取自己的自由而于1846年提 起诉讼
Brown v. Topeka Board
The case is a huge social
本案对于社会的影响是
impact, impact level is not only in education, followed by many blacks to sue for unfair apartheid measures, and the reference case as a reason, and often successful . The Judgment does for blacks to fight for the desegregation of great help.