About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

36 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 547 (1994-1995)
The Social Construction of Brown v. Board of Education: Law Reform and the Reconstructive Paradox

handle is hein.journals/wmlr36 and id is 559 raw text is: THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION LAW REFORM AND THE RECONSTRUCTIVE PARADOX RICHARD DELGADO* JEAN STEFANCIC** INTRODUCTION Broadly speaking, there are two views about Brown v. Board of Educatin.1 The conventional view holds that Brown is one of the two or three most important cases in American legal history According to this interpretation, Brown supplied the impetus for the modem civil rights movement, demonstrated that courts, at least at times, can assert moral leadership, and emphasized that African Americans are entitled to live in the United States on terms equal to whites.2 The other view, that of the revisionists, holds that Brown v. Board of Educatin accomplished relatively little, either in the short or long run.? Revisionists argue that Brown is the product of a momentary convergence between white and black interests that began to fade soon thereafter.4 Some argue that landmark cases like Brown may even impair the cause of black rights by inducing a mood of unwarranted euphoria among supporters * Charles Inglis Thomson Professor of Law, University of Colorado. J.D., Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California, Berkeley, 1974. ** Research Associate, Umversity of Colorado School of Law. M.A., University of San Francisco, 1989. 1. 347 U.S. 483 (1954). 2. Books in this general vem include RIcHARD KLUGER, SIMPLE JUSTICE (1976); and JUAN WILLIAMS, EYES ON THE PRIZE (1987). For a discussion of the conventional view and its alleged weaknesses, see Michael J. Klarman, Brown; Ractal Change and the Civil Rights Movement, 80 VA. L. REV. 7 (1994). 3. On the revisionist view of Brown, see, for example, KIarman, supra note 2; on the revisionist view of law reform generally, see GERALD N. ROSENBERG, THE HOL- LOW HOPE: CAN COURTS BRING ABOUT SOCIAL CHANGE? (1991); see also Derrick A. Bell, Jr., Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma, 93 HARV. L. REV. 518 (1980). 4. E.g., Bell, supra note 3. 547

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most