Online access and copy requests are not available for this item. You may request to be notified of when this becomes available digitally.
- GLC#
- GLC09925.02-View header record
- Type
- Books & pamphlets
- Date
- 1999
- Author/Creator
- Motley, Constance Baker, 1921-2005
- Title
- Equal Justice Under Law
- Place Written
- New York, New York
- Pagination
- 1 v. : 288 p. : 16 p. : of plates
- Primary time period
- 1945 to the Present
- Sub-Era
- The Civil Rights Movement
One copy of Equal Justice Under Law by Constance Baker Motley published in 1999. The book is separated into twelve chapters with an appendix, notes, acknowledgements, and index to follow. The chapters are entitled; New Haven 1921-41, College and Law School, 1941-46, The Prelude to Brown, Plessy v. Ferguson: Our Nineteenth-Century Legacy, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas: Our Twentieth-Century Legacy, Massive Resistance and the Immediate Post-Brown Era, Desegregation and the Rise of the Federal Judiciary, The End of an Era and the Beginning of Another, James Meredith and the University of Mississippi, Supreme Court Years, 1961-65, A New Career, The Supreme Court and Affirmative Action. The book is one of, the most detailed accounts of the legal conflicts of the civil rights movement.
Citation Guidelines for Online Resources
- Copyright Notice
- The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.