Talk:Murray v. Pearson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ruling[edit]

Currently this stub reads as though the court ruled that racial segregation was wrong. However a contributor at Talk:Thurgood Marshall#Murray didn't overturn Plessy argues that it upheld the "separate but equal" status, and found that the Law School was in breach of the "equal" bit - but since the court couldn't create separate laws schools it had to abolish the separate status to deliver equal provision.

Is anyone able to write this clearer? Timrollpickering 03:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Murray v. Pearson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]