Sipuel v. Board of Regents
U.S.
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2001Belk v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg 4th Cir.
- 2001Belk v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 4th Cir.
- 1995Faulkner v. Jones 4th Cir.
- 1991United States v. Virginia W.D. Va.
- 1991Knight v. Alabama N.D. Ala.
- 1989Grubbs v. Alabama State Bar Ala.
- 1979Geier v. University of Tennessee 6th Cir.
- 1978Penick v. Columbus Board of Education 6th Cir.
- 1978Regents of the University of California v. Bakke U.S.
- 1976National Ass'n for Advancement of Colored People v. Lansing Board of Education W.D. Mich.
Cites 2 cases
- Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada
- Sipuel v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
SIPUEL v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA et al.
Attorneys
- Thurgood Marshall and Amos T. Hall argued the cause for petitioner. With them on the brief was Frank D. Reeves.
- Fred Hansen, First Assistant Attorney General of Oklahoma, and Maurice H. Merrill argued the cause for respondents. With them on the brief was Mac Q. Williamson, Attorney General.
- Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed by Robert W. Kenny, O. John Rogge, and Andrew D. Weinberger for the National Lawyers Guild; and Arthur Garfield Hays and Osmond K. Fraenkel for the American Civil Liberties Union.
On January 14, 1946, the petitioner, a Negro, concededly qualified to receive the professional legal education offered by the State, applied for admission to the School of Law of the University of Oklahoma, the only institution for legal education supported and maintained by the taxpayers of the State of Oklahoma. Petitioner’s application for admission was denied, solely because of her color.
Petitioner then made application for a writ of mandamus in the District Court of Cleveland County, Oklahoma. The writ of mandamus was refused, and the Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma affirmed the judgment of the District Court. 199 Okla. 36, 180 P. 2d 135. We brought the case here for review.
The petitioner is entitled to secure legal education afforded by a state institution. To this time, it has been denied her although during the same period many white applicants have been afforded legal education by the State. The State must provide it for her in conformity with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and provide it as soon as it does for applicants of any other group. Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U. S. 337 (1938).
The judgment of the Supreme Court of Oklahoma is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Reversed.