Invisible Walls: An Examination of the Legal Strategy of the Restrictive Covenant Cases

On May 3, 1948, the Supreme Court issued two decisions in four cases that are now remembered as Shelley v. Kraemer. The conflict which caused the litigation arose from a dramatic population shift that occurred in the early decades of the twentieth century. The great migration of black families from rural areas to urban industrial centers prompted various efforts to establish and maintain racial segregation in housing. After legislated segregation failed, private covenants became the primary vehicle for maintaining segregated housing. The forces against restrictive covenants consisted of black families in search of adequate housing, the NAACP, and the lawyers who served on that organization\u27s legal committee. Charles Hamilton Houston, who served at various times as counsel to the NAACP and was dean of Howard University Law School and the architect of the NAACP\u27s school desegregation strategy, devised the restrictive covenant strategy. The covenant strategy involved an evidentiary demonstration of the relationship of crime and disease to overcrowded conditions in urban ghettoes, and the role of restrictive covenants in the perpetuation of those problems. This strategy, which made the victory in Shelley possible, also had a profound influence on the Supreme Court\u27s attitude toward civil rights litigation. This Article will explore the origin and development of the covenants, and examine urban housing conditions in the 1930s and 1940s. It will review the NAACP\u27s legal strategy and that organization\u27s coordination of the covenant litigation, and it will analyze each of the four cases that eventually reached the Supreme Court

Turning Back the Clock: The Assault on Affirmative Action

This Article considers the legal and policy issues presented by affirmative action in higher education

Privatizing Regulation: Whistleblowing and Bounty Hunting in the Financial Services Industries

Addresses use of whistleblowers and suggests private enforcement methodologies to supplement or supplant public enforcement activities in financial services under new law

LEAD ARTICLE - Setting the Stage for \u3ci\u3eBrown\u3c/i\u3e: The Development and Implementation of the NAACP\u27s School Desegregation Campaign, 1930-1950

The protest against segregation began early in the twentieth century, not long after the Supreme Court\u27s 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson. The fight was led by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored Persons ( NAACP ), which was founded in 1909 by a group of black activists and white progressives. After years of lobbying, organizing local chapters, and engaging in other activities, the NAACP shifted its direction. In the early 1930s, the organization embarked on a long-range, carefully coordinated litigation campaign that challenged the laws that enforced segregation. During the years that followed, a legal revolution was set into motion that altered the foundations of American jurisprudence. The NAACP\u27s litigation campaign is not as well remembered as the grassroots demonstrations of the 1960s, but the culminating event of that phase of the Civil Rights movement, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, is celebrated as the most significant Supreme Court decision of modern legal history. The decision in Brown was the first of a series of decisions that struck down Jim Crow laws and paved the way for the federal Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s. ... The significance of the decision in Brown is well-documented, but it cannot be fully appreciated without an examination of the cases that led to it. This Article explores the evolution of the legal strategy that was used in the graduate and professional school cases that set the stage for Brown. Part II examines Charles Houston\u27s tenure at Howard Law School. During those years Houston transformed that institution from a marginal night school to a fully accredited, first-rate institution. Under Houston\u27s leadership, students at Howard were trained to structure the test cases that challenged the laws that provided the basis for segregation. Part III examines the significance of the Margold Report, a study that was commissioned by the NAACP\u27s Board of Directors in the early 1930s. The report contained a detailed examination of the separate but equal doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson and suggested ways in which the policy might be challenged in the courts. After Houston was selected to head the NAACP\u27s litigation campaign in 1935, he modified the Margold Report\u27s recommendations and developed what became the equalization strategy. This approach involved filing cases in Southern states, demanding that the educational resources made available for African-American students be upgraded to make them equal to those provided for whites. Carefully remaining within the confines of Plessy, the equalization cases were premised on the theory that the states that practiced segregation could not afford the expense of maintaining separate educational systems that were actually equal. As Part IV of this Article explains, these early cases focused on graduate and professional schools, the area in which the Southern states were most vulnerable. In a series of cases in Maryland, Missouri, Texas, and Oklahoma, the NAACP\u27s lawyers were able to chip away the foundation of segregation. By the early 1950s the Plessy rationale had been completely undermined. This Article demonstrates that, without these efforts, the decision in Brown would not have been possible

Brown v. Board of Education: Caste, Culture, and the Constitution

https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/books/1059/thumbnail.jp

Privatizing Regulation: Whistleblowing and Bounty Hunting in the Financial Services Industries

Addresses use of whistleblowers and suggests private enforcement methodologies to supplement or supplant public enforcement activities in financial services under new law

Protectin DX increases alveolar fluid clearance in rats with lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a life-threatening critical syndrome resulting largely from the accumulation of and the inability to clear pulmonary edema. Protectin DX, an endogenously produced lipid mediator, is believed to exert anti-inflammatory and pro-resolution effects. Protectin DX (5 µg/kg) was injected i.v. 8 h after LPS (14 mg/kg) administration, and alveolar fluid clearance was measured in live rats (n = 8). In primary rat ATII epithelial cells, protectin DX (3.605 × 10 mg/l) was added to the culture medium with LPS for 6 h. Protectin DX improved alveolar fluid clearance (9.65 ± 1.60 vs. 15.85 ± 1.49, p < 0.0001) and decreased pulmonary edema and lung injury in LPS-induced lung injury in rats. Protectin DX markedly regulated alveolar fluid clearance by upregulating sodium channel and Na, K-ATPase protein expression levels in vivo and in vitro. Protectin DX also increased the activity of Na, K-ATPase and upregulated P-Akt via inhibiting Nedd4-2 in vivo. In addition, protectin DX enhanced the subcellular distribution of sodium channels and Na, K-ATPase, which were specifically localized to the apical and basal membranes of primary rat ATII cells. Furthermore, BOC-2, Rp-cAMP, and LY294002 blocked the increased alveolar fluid clearance in response to protectin DX. Protectin DX stimulates alveolar fluid clearance through a mechanism partly dependent on alveolar epithelial sodium channel and Na, K-ATPase activation via the ALX/PI3K/Nedd4-2 signaling pathway