Brown V Board of Education of Topeka: The Influence of Social Science

The landmark case Plessy v Ferguson established a doctrine of "Separate but Equal" that legalized de jure segregation for the first half of the 20^th century. This doctrine was not reversed until the Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. Many factors pushed the court in favor of declaring segregation unconstitutional. Scientific studies regarding the detrimental effects of segregation combined with international conflicts abroad led to a growing national feeling of guilt that convinced the Supreme Court to overturn the long-held precedent of Plessy v Ferguson

Prominent social scientists such as Louisa Holt, Hugh W. Speer and Kenneth Clark presented evidence that influenced the Supreme Court's decision in Brown. Such evidence would have been meaningless in the context of Plessy v Ferguson because social sciences such as sociology and psychology were not widely accepted in 1896. In fact, the sociological methods often utilized at the time of Brown were commonly ridiculed during the late 19^th Century. Albion Small, founder of the first University Sociology Program in the United States commented that in earlier years, the social sciences were, "ridiculed by a hundred academic men to every one who was willing to consider them seriously." This public scorn of the sociology and psychology may explain Justice Henry Brown- who voted in favor of segregation in the Plessy decision-and his belief in the "fallacy of the...assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority."² Psychological evidence suggesting otherwise would not have been publicly accepted at this time, as it was in the 1950's, and thus, would not have held the influence in the Plessy v Ferguson courtroom that it did in the case of Brown v Board of Education.

Due to the increasing public acceptance of psychology and sociology, the justices in the courts of Brown were more inclined to interpret the 14^th Amendment as promoting social equality of the races. In contrast, Justice Henry Brown believed that the 14^th amendment had not been intended to "Abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political, equality." This interpretation of the 14^th Amendment, coupled with the Court's rejection of the "Negro Inferiority" argument, ultimately convinced most Justices to vote in favor of segregation laws. The Justices who voted in Brown v Board of Education, however, studied the psychological and sociological evidence presented by prominent social scientists and used it to interpret the 14^th Amendment as protecting social equality as well political.

One social scientist who testified about the detrimental effects of segregation was Louisa Holt, a psychology teacher from Topeka. Holt believed that legally enforced segregation negatively impacted African American children, because it was "inevitably interpreted both by white people and by negroes as denoting the inferiority of the Negro group." Holt continued to explain that without this sense of inferiority, there would be no basis for racial segregation to exist at all. To explain the far-reaching implications of perceived inferiority, she cited a study conducted at Harvard University. This study proved that "the later achievement of individuals in their adult occupational careers can be predicted at the first grade." As such, if first-grade African Americans were negatively impacted by feelings of inferiority that stemmed from segregation, the effects on their adult lives could be harmful as well.

Education Specialist Hugh W. Speer backed up Holt's argument of the effects of inferiority stigma with a definition and explanation of "curriculum." Speer defined curriculum as "the total school experience of the child...a child's total development, his personality, his personal and social adjustment." In Speer's opinion, social attitudes were as important to a child's curriculum as the more traditional subjects of English and Mathematics. Speer held that, "If the colored children are denied the experience in school of associating with white children...then the colored child's curriculum is being greatly curtailed...any school curriculum cannot be equal under segregation."

The final argument from a social scientist presented in Brown v Board of Education, came from Dr. Kenneth Clark. Clark tested several African American children by showing them African American and Caucasian dolls and requesting the children to distinguish between the "good doll" and the "bad doll."The children overwhelmingly distinguished black dolls as "bad" and white dolls as "nice." After explaining the results of the experiment to the court, Clark provided his interpretation: "The Negro child accepts as early as six..the negative stereotypes about his own group." This explanation, when considered with Holt and Speer's arguments on the effects of feelings of inferiority in all areas of African American's lives, served to instill a sense of guilt into the public and member of the Supreme Court, a feeling only strengthened by following arguments regarding the effects of segregation in international affairs.

In the Amicus Curiae Briefs, various groups came forward with evidence concerning the negative impact domestic racial policies could have abroad. These arguments were especially effective against the backdrop of the Cold War and the defeat of the Axis Powers in World War Two. The opinions expressed in these Briefs largely reflected the viewpoints of many Americans, who were beginning to feel that continuing outdated policies of segregation would only serve to the advantage of the Soviet Union and other Communist nations. This sentiment was expressed well in a statement by the Attorney General that articulated equal rights as an important element in "the context of the present world struggle between freedom and tyranny." The Attorney General further played off anti-communist sentiment with the appeal: "We must set an example for others by showing firm determination to remove existing flaws in our democracy."

Important organizations and federations such as the American Jewish Congress and the American Veterans committee drew on the experiences of the Jews in Nazi Germany. These associations compared the Nazi treatment of Jews to the United States' treatment of African Americans. The American Jewish Congress argued that "the persecution at any time of any minority portends the shape and intensity of persecution of all minorities." Coming from a Jewish organization, this argument played well into the horror of many Americans at the treatment of Jews and other groups during the Holocaust. Arguments such as this, then, effectively added to the sense of guilt already established in evidence presented by social scientists.

Together, the arguments of important psychologists and sociolinguists, as well as the arguments brought forward in the Amicus Curiae Briefs reflected changing public opinion regarding de jure segregation. Changes in opinions regarding the validity of social sciences, interpretation of the 14^th Amendment, and the concerns of foreign policy surrounding World War Two and the Cold War affected the Supreme Court Justices and even the American public in ways that would have been unimaginable at the time of Plessy v Ferguson. The overwhelming evidence in favor of desegregation convinced the Court to reach a unanimous decision that "in the field of public education the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place."

Sources:

Small, Albion. "Fifty Year of Sociology in the United States." The American Journal of Sociology 21 (1916): 772-773.
Justice Henry Brown, writing for the majority, Plessy v Ferguson, No. 537 (1896).

Records and Briefs of the U.S. Supreme Court 349 U.S. 294, Part 1. Found in Mark Whitman ed., Removing a Badge of Slaver: The Record of Brown v Board of Education (Princeton and New York: Marjus Wiener Publishers Inc, pp. 60-61

Records and Briefs of the U.S. Supreme Court 349 U.S. 294, Part 1. Found in Removing a Badge of Slavery, pp. 70-71