Palmer v. Thompson case brief summary
403 U.S. 217 (1971)
CASE SYNOPSIS
On certiorari, plaintiff
African-American citizens challenged a judgment from the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that upheld a decision
from a district court in which it was held that the decision of
defendants, a mayor and a city council (collectively, the city), to
close all city swimming pools after the city's operation of
segregated pools had been declared unconstitutional.CASE FACTS
In prior litigation, the city's operation of segregated swimming pools and other public attractions was declared unconstitutional as a violation of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. The city desegregated some attractions but decided to close all of its public pools. Several African-American citizens brought suit to force the city to reopen the pools and operate them on a desegregated basis. The trial court denied the requested relief and the appellate court affirmed.
DISCUSSION
- On certiorari the Court ruled that substantial evidence supported the city's claims, as accepted by the lower courts, that it was neither safe to operate the pools on an integrated basis nor economically feasible to do so.
- Consequently, the Court ruled, the lower courts correctly held that the city did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Moreover, the Court ruled, there was no evidence in the record to show that the city was covertly aiding the maintenance and operation of pools that were private in name only.
- The record, the Court ruled, showed no state action affecting the races differently.
- The Court summarily dismissed the citizens' claim that the city's conduct violated the Thirteenth Amendment.
The Court affirmed the judgment. The city's decision to close all swimming pools did not violate the Thirteenth or Fourteenth Amendments. Substantial evidence supported the city's claim that the pools were closed to maintain peace and order and because the pools could not be operated economically on an integrated basis. Moreover, there was no indication that the city was involved in maintaining private, segregated pools.
No comments:
Post a Comment