Mark Kaplan

Klarman Book Review

Michael J. Klarman, in his book Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights
Movement, presents a nuanced opinion on the causes and effects of the famous Supreme Court
case Brown v. Board of Education. He proposes that Brown v. Board of Education was possible
in 1954 because dramatic changes in racial attitudes and practices had already occurred [i]n
the absence of such changes, Brown would not have been decided as it was.1 Klarman
categorizes the changes as internal and external with relation to the American South. Internally,
many urban and educated white Southerners became more tolerant of blacks. Klarman posits that
the prevailing racial norms of the South would only change due to external pressure.
As Southern blacks obtained educations, improved their economic standing, and created
communal institutions such as churches and colleges, they applied economic pressure through
boycotts, on those who supported racism. With the development of the NAACP, lawsuits
emerged to equalize spending on black education and give blacks more opportunities to vote.
Black veterans returning from World War II imbued the black community with a more militant
philosophy. The federal government, in response to the racist regime that Nazism was built upon,
and to garner support of decolonized African countries, moved to support racial change. These
phenomena triggered the South to move towards racial equality.
Klarman proceeds to investigate which factors influence judges, law and precedent, or
personal opinions and the prevailing attitude of society. He concludes that When the legal
sources are relatively determinate, the justices tend to adhere to them, unless their political
1 Michael J. Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, Abridged
Edition of From Jim Crow to Civil Rights : The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial
Equality, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 213

preferences to the contrary are very strong [t]he justices invalidated the grandfather clause in
Guinn (1915) because these were transparent evasions of constitutional constraints. Had the
Fourteenth Amendment explicitly barred segregation, Plessy might well have come out the other
way [w]hen the justices personal preferences are strong, they may reject even relatively
determinate law. Brown illustrates this point. To the justices who were most committed to the
traditional legal sources, Brown should have been an easy casefor sustaining school
segregation [y]et, in 1954, most of the justices considered racial segregationthe doctrine that
Hitler had preachedto be evil, and they were determined to forbid it, regardless of whether
conventional legal sources sanctioned that result.2
Klarman does not view the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court as being motivated
by a mythical and redeemer-like outlook to save the the oppressed, but rather as response to the
prevailing attitude of American society. The Supreme Court did not enact Brown when blacks
were outrageously oppressed, but rather only after, and as a response to, the aforementioned
changing social norms. Klarman extends this view to the federal government as well, Congress
and the president ultimately got behind Brown, not because of Brown, but because the civil rights
movement had altered public opinion on school segregation.3 Ironically, Klarman notes,
when a minority group suffering oppression is most in need of judicial protection, it is least
likely to receive it.4
Klarman then analyzes the effectiveness and enforcement of Brown. He suggests that
changing a certain law will not affect actions motivated by a racist ideology and personal
opinion, therefore the passing of Brown had little effect on Southern racists. Furthermore, most
of the Southern officials that were responsible for enforcing Brown - school board members,
2 Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, 216
3 Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, 225-226
4 Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, 216

judges, jurors, politicians, and law enforcement officer- disagreed with it.5 Klarman also notes
that by following Brown no economic advantages were gained, as opposed to Roe v. Wade, which
ensured the development of a market to supply what those exercising the Roe right demanded:
abortion services.6
Klarman examines the effects Brown had on American society. It inspired blacks to
continue to fight for the cause of racial equality. The passing of Brown also created a significant
backlash, which radicalized opinions, moving many Southerners to violently express their racist
ideology by defying the Courts rulings. In response, a counter backlash emerged. Many whites,
who formerly agreed passively with Brown, after seeing the violence in the South, started to
demand civil rights legislation that attacked Jim Crow at its core.7
Michael J. Klarmans book accurately reflects my opinion. Brown did not revolutionize
race relations in America, and it had a myriad of positive and negative effects on both blacks and
whites. As Klarman concludes: Court decisions do matter, though often in unpredictable ways.8

5
6
7
8

Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, 226
Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, 226
Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, 229
Klarman, Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement, 231