The United States Supreme Court and the Negro

A recent Supreme Court trial prevents the “coeducation” of black and white children; The Planet declares that this decision is unconstitutional and “swayed by political conditions.”

The Supreme Court of the United States has handed down another one of its decisions showing its antipathy to the colored people of this country and emphasizing the fact that none of us may expect to hope for justice within its confines. The fact that this expression of a legal opinion followed so closely after an election shows that it was swayed by political conditions and feared the effect of its utterances upon the colored vote in the doubtful states. When it is observed that the court’s political complexion is Republican upon all but question affecting the colored people of this country, we confess that it confirms the opinion previously expressed in these columns, that a Negro can get as much and more justice before the supreme tribunals in the states than he can in Washington. It was the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia that reversed the Corporation Court of Henrico county in the Fulton Park case, deciding that a specification in a deed that property should not be sold to colored people was null and void. As a result, colored people are in possession of the park in question. Who would have thought of going beyond the Virginia tribunal to test the matter? Certainly not the colored folks who have learned to know that Virginians “to the manor born” can be trusted upon questions involving constitutional rights and vital principles. It was the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia that practically ordered the release of Messrs. William Conquest and S.L. Burton, the alleged Accomac rioters. But to the decision of that truly remarkable coterie of jurists at Washington. Here is what is said: “Washington, November 9. - In deciding the case of Berea College against the state of Kentucky favorably to the state, the Supreme Court today held that a State of the Union may constitutionally legislate to prevent the coeducation of the white and black races. The case was instituted to test the validity of the State law of 1904, prohibiting white and black children from attending the same schools. The higher State Court took the position that the white and black races are naturally antagonistic, and that the enforced separation of the children of the two is in the line of the preservation of the peace. The opinion of the Supreme Court was handed down by Justice Brewer and affirmed the finding of both the Kentucky Circuit Court and the Court of Appeals. Justices Harlan and day dissented.” It will be seen even in this case that the Supreme Court of Appeals, a Democratic body was equally fair and outspoken in its conclusions as was the Supreme Court of Appeals of the United States. In our opinion both the courts of Kentucky and the one at Washington are wrong, but what was the use of going up to the city, where President Roosevelt resided to find it out? We now know in advance what to expect in the case of the colored soldier from New York, who is seeking through legal channels to be restored to the roster of the army, although he was removed therefrom by President Roosevelt’s order. The telegraphic report says further: “Justice Brewer’s opinion dealt entirely with corporations as affected by the Kentucky statute, and did not consider the question of its applicability to individuals. Proceeding upon the theory that a state has complete control over corporations as its own creations, he then construed the law of 1904 as in effect an amendment to the charter of Berea College and added: “It is undoubtedly true that the reserved power to alter or amend is subject to some limitations, and that under the guise of a new contract may not always be enforceable upon the corporation of the stockholders; but it is settled that a power reserved to the Legislature to alter, amend, or repeal a charter authorizes it to make an alteration or amendment of a charter granted, subject to it, which will not defeat or substantially impair the object of the grant, or any rights vested under it, and which the Legislature may deem necessary...

“The United States Supreme Court and the Negro,” Black Virginia: The Richmond Planet, 1894-1909, accessed August 13, 2026, https://blackvirginia.richmond.edu/items/show/743.