SIPUEL V. BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF OKL.(1948)
[ Sipuel v. Board of Regents of University of Okl. 332 U.S. 631 (1948) ] [332 U.S. 631 , 632]
Messrs. Thurgood Marshall, of New York City, and Amos Hall, of Tulsa, Okl., for petitioner.
Messrs. Fred Hansen, of Oklahoma City, Okl., and Maurice H. Merrill, of Norman, Okl., for respondents.
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. Okl. Sup., 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 [332 U.S. 631 , 633] 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. State of Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada, 1938, 305 U.S. 337 .
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.
LEE v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
Was this helpful?