Sweatt v. Painter (1950)

Background of the Case

No law school in the state of Texas admitted African American students, and in 1946, Herman Sweatt applied to the School of Law at the University of Texas. A letter carrier in Texas, Sweatt was frustrated because his employer continued to pass over him for promotion to a clerical position, a job that was more lucrative and less physically taxing. Sweatt believed he would be better able to help himself and others like him with a law degree. He sought help from the NAACP in the hope that the association would select and help fund his case.

Though Sweatt had graduated from an unaccredited college, Marshall felt that the University of Texas had denied Sweatt admission not because of the quality of his education and preparedness for law school but instead solely on the basis of race. The School of Law refused Sweatt admission, stating in its rejection letter that the Texas Constitution prohibited integrated education. Marshall and Durham filed suit in Texas on behalf of Sweatt, arguing that since the state had no law school for African Americans and made no financial arrangements for African Americans to attend a black law school out of state, the state had violated Sweatt's right to separate but equal accommodations.

Instead of issuing a writ of mandamus, commanding the university to admit Sweatt, the district court in Travis County continued the case for six months, allowing the state time to establish the Thurgood Marshall School of Law, a separate law school at the historically black Texas Southern University in Houston, Texas. After six months [Page 2035]the district court ruled against Sweatt, arguing that the new law school provided in-state legal education for African American students, as per the spirit of the separate but equal doctrine. Sweatt took his case to the Court of Civil Appeals and the Texas State Supreme Court, but both courts refused to overturn the lower court's decision.

...