Palmer v. Thompson
Palmer v. Thompson is a significant Supreme Court case decided in 1971, which involved the city of Jackson, Mississippi, and its decision to close a public swimming pool instead of operating it as an integrated facility following a federal court order for desegregation. The case highlights the complexities of civil rights and the legal interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. The Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling upheld the city’s choice to close the pool, arguing that the city provided a plausible nondiscriminatory reason for its actions. However, this decision was met with dissent from several justices who believed there was clear evidence of discriminatory intent behind the city's actions, reflecting broader tensions in the civil rights movement. The dissenting justices argued that such a closure perpetuated racial discrimination and undermined the principles of equality. Over time, the Court’s stance on issues of discrimination evolved, indicating a gradual shift toward recognizing the importance of addressing racially motivated decisions. This case remains a critical reference point in discussions about race, public facilities, and the legal framework surrounding civil rights in the United States.
Palmer v. Thompson
Date: June 14, 1971
Citation: 403 U.S. 217
Issue: Racial discrimination
Significance: The Supreme Court refused to seek out racially discriminatory intent in cases in which local government decisions were neutral on face.
Justice Hugo L. Black wrote the opinion for the 5-4 majority, upholding the decision of the city of Jackson, Mississippi, to close a public swimming pool rather than operate it as an integrated facility. Lower federal courts had ordered the pool to be integrated, and the city closed it rather than comply. African Americans thought this showed a clear discriminatory intent, but the Supreme Court was reluctant to go beyond the plausible nondiscriminatory reason the city offered for its decision. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger concurred, and Justices William O. Douglas, Byron R. White, Thurgood Marshall, and William J. Brennan, Jr., dissented, finding that there was sufficient evidence of discriminatory intent to justify overturning this local government decision as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. The Court subsequently moved more in the direction of the dissenters’ point of view.
