CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTION SEGREGATION IN RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FURNISHED BY A MUNICIPALITY

Authors

James S. Taylor S. Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

The plaintiff, a Negro, was denied admission to a municipal golf course under an ordinance setting aside certain public parks for the exclusive use of Negroes, and providing that all other public parks were for the exclusive use of white people. Only the public parks provided for the "whites" had golf courses, though in all other respects the park facilities offered were substantially equal. The plaintiff brought an action in a federal district court for a declaratory judgment as to his civil rights and for an injunction protecting such rights. The injunction was denied on the grounds that the facilities offered to Negroes were "substantially equal" to those reserved to the "whites." On appeal, held, reversed. Statutory denial of the right to use the municipal golf course, solely because of race, is a denial of equal protection of the laws when equal facilities are not provided for members of the excluded race. Beal v. Holcombe, (5th Cir. 1951) 193 F. (2d) 384.

Recommended Citation

James S. Taylor S. Ed., CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTION SEGREGATION IN RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FURNISHED BY A MUNICIPALITY, 51 Mich. L. Rev. 105 (1952).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol51/iss1/10