Lucy v. Adams
Appearance
| Lucy v. Adams | |
|---|---|
| Decided October 10, 1955 | |
| Full case name | Lucy et al. v. Adams, Dean of Admissions, University of Alabama |
| Citations | 350 U.S. 1 (more) 76 S. Ct. 33; 100 L. Ed. 2d 3; 1955 U.S. LEXIS 340 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Injunction granted, 134 F. Supp. 235 (N.D. Ala. 1955). |
| Holding | |
| The injunction which the District Court issued in this case, but suspended pending appeal to the Court of Appeals, is reinstated to the extent that it enjoins and restrains the respondent and others designated from denying these petitioners, solely on account of their race or color, the right to enroll in the University of Alabama and pursue courses of study there. The motion is denied. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Warren, joined by unanimous |
Lucy v. Adams, 350 U.S. 1 (1955), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that successfully established the right of all citizens to be accepted as students at the University of Alabama.
The case involved African American citizens Autherine Lucy and Polly Anne Myers, who were refused admission to the University of Alabama solely on account of their race or color.
The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court decision, saying that it enjoins and restrains the respondent and others designated from denying these petitioners, solely on account of their race or color, the right to enroll in the University of Alabama and pursue courses of study there.
See also
[edit]External links
[edit]- Text of Lucy v. Adams, 350 U.S. 1 (1955) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress
Categories:
- United States case law stubs
- United States Supreme Court cases in 1955
- United States Supreme Court cases
- United States Supreme Court cases of the Warren Court
- United States equal protection case law
- United States school desegregation case law
- History of the University of Alabama
- African-American history of Alabama
- 1955 in Alabama
- Legal history of Alabama
- Civil rights movement case law