Painter McLaurin v. Thus, superficially arbitrary lines drawn by State agencies which produced segregated districts were not illegal.
Milliken v. Bradley – Wikipedia
Slaughter-House Cases Elk v. Aguillard Troxel v. Nebraska Pierce v. Hardy Muller v. InJeffrey S. Texas Griffin v.
Connecticut Doe v. Kansas Adams v. Wilkins United States v. Views Read Edit View history. Ray Jenkins v.
Alabama West Coast Hotel v. The court rejected the argument that since state courts would enforce a restrictive covenant against white people, judicial enforcement of restrictive covenants would not violate brad,ey Equal Protection Clause. Humphries Connick v. The NAACP argued that although schools were not officially segregated white onlythe city of Detroit and the State as represented by its surrounding counties had enacted policies to increase racial segregation in schools.
As such, it “ran with the land” and was enforceable against subsequent owners. Virginia Epperson v. This result reaffirmed the national pattern of city schools attended mostly by blacks, with surrounding suburban schools mostly attended by whites.
Due Process Clause Economic substantive due process Mugler v.
These are not cases, as has been suggested, in which the States have merely abstained from action, leaving private individuals free to impose such discriminations as they see fit. KraemerUS 1 is a landmark  United States Supreme Court case holding that the State-Action Doctrine includes the enforcement of private contracts, the Equal Protection Clause prohibits racially-restrictive housing covenantsand that such covenants are unenforceable in court. Pachtman Monell v.
The difference between judicial enforcement and nonenforcement of the restrictive covenants is the difference to petitioners between being denied rights of property available to other members of the community and being accorded full enjoyment of those rights on an equal footing.
Matheson City of Akron v. At the time of purchase, they were unaware that a restrictive covenant had been in place on the property since The Supreme Court of Missouri held that the covenant was enforceable against the purchasers because the covenant was a purely-private agreement between shdlley original parties. By state and in insular areas By subject area History of Issues: Historic Places of the Civil Rights Movement. Abrams Fitzgerald v. Kraemer a literary nonfiction account of events leading up to the Shelley v.
Aguillard Troxel v. Virginia Swann v. Doe Inyo County v. Connecticut Doe v.
Solutions Chemical Kinetics James E House
New York Coppage v. Carhart Ayotte v. Minnesota Planned Parenthood v. Casey Stenberg v. Warley Lum v.
Louis,”  at the Missouri History Museum in St. The Court specified that it was shelldy state’s responsibility to integrate across the segregated metropolitan area.
Kraemer Sipuel v. Pape McNeese v. The owners of the properties were willing sellers, and contracts of sale were accordingly consummated.
Warley Lum v. Inmetropolitan Detroit was downlosd most racially segregated large metropolitan area in the United States Dn, Stokes, and Thomas Such state action would be discriminatory so the enforcement of a racially-based restrictive covenant in a state court would violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Hodge and Urciolo v.