Brown II — LLMpedia

Brown II
Name	Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (II)
Litigants	Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (II)
Decided	May 31, 1955
Full name	Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 349 U.S. 294 (1955)
Citations	349 U.S. 294
Prior	Brown I, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)
Subsequent	Various lower court proceedings on implementation.
Holding	The Supreme Court remanded the cases to the lower courts to oversee desegregation of public schools, ordering that it proceed "with all deliberate speed."
SCOTUS	1953–1954
Majority	Warren
Joinmajority	Unanimous
Laws applied	U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Contents

Background and Legal Context
The Supreme Court's Ruling
The "All Deliberate Speed" Mandate
Implementation and Southern Resistance
Impact on School Desegregation

Brown II. The formal name for the 1955 United States Supreme Court decision, *Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (II)*, which addressed the implementation of its landmark 1954 ruling against racial segregation in public schools. This follow-up decree, issued unanimously, tasked federal district courts with overseeing the transition to desegregated systems but used the ambiguous phrase "with all deliberate speed," which ultimately allowed for prolonged delays and significant resistance. The ruling is a critical, yet contentious, chapter in the nation's legal and social history, highlighting the complex struggle between federal authority and states' rights during the Civil rights movement.

Background and Legal Context

The 1954 decision in *Brown v. Board of Education* (*Brown I*) declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students to be unconstitutional, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Court's ruling did not provide specific instructions or a timeline for ending school segregation. Recognizing the profound social and administrative challenges involved, the Court scheduled further arguments on the question of relief—how to effectively implement its decision. These rearguments, held in April 1955, involved the original parties from Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, and the District of Columbia. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), led by attorneys like Thurgood Marshall and Robert L. Carter, argued for a prompt and definite desegregation decree. In contrast, attorneys for the resisting states, such as John W. Davis and T. Justin Moore, advocated for local control and a gradual, indefinite approach, warning of social upheaval.

The Supreme Court's Ruling

On May 31, 1955, Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court in *Brown II*. The Court acknowledged the varied local school problems across the nation and the practical complexities of transitioning from a dual system to a non-racial one. Rejecting the NAACP's call for immediate desegregation deadlines, the Court instead placed primary responsibility for overseeing the process on the local federal district courts. These courts were instructed to require defendant school boards to "make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance" with the *Brown I* principles. The ruling emphasized that the district courts should consider factors related to administration, such as physical facilities, transportation systems, personnel assignments, and revision of local laws. The goal was to admit students to public schools on a racially non-discriminatory basis "with all deliberate speed."

The "All Deliberate Speed" Mandate

The phrase "with all deliberate speed," borrowed from English law, became the defining and most controversial element of the *Brown II* decree. While intended to provide flexibility and acknowledge practical difficulties, the ambiguity of the term provided a legal shield for deliberate obstruction. Proponents of massive resistance in the South interpreted "deliberate" to mean slow and cautious, allowing for strategies of delay and minimal compliance. The mandate stood in contrast to the clear, immediate injunction sought by civil rights lawyers. Critics, including later justices like Hugo Black, argued that the phrase was a fatal compromise that undermined the constitutional right established in *Brown I* by substituting a vague equitable remedy for a firm command, thereby emboldening segregationist forces.

Implementation and Southern Resistance

The implementation of *Brown II* was met with widespread, organized resistance across the South, particularly in the Deep South. Many state and local governments adopted a strategy of massive resistance, using every legal and extralegal means to avoid desegregation. The Virginia General Assembly, led by Senator Harry F. Byrd, passed a series of laws to cut off state funds to any integrated schools and to authorize school closures. In 1957, the Little Rock Crisis erupted when Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus used the Arkansas National Guard to block nine black students from entering Little Rock Central High School, forcing President Dwight D. Eisenhower to federalize the guard and deploy the 101st Airborne Division. Other tactics included "pupil placement" laws, which assigned students based on subjective criteria, and the establishment of publicly funded private "segregation academies." Federal district judges, often local appointees, frequently tolerated these delay tactics, leading to years of litigation and minimal actual integration in many districts.

Impact on School Desegregation