“In each of the cases, minors of the Negro race, through their legal representatives, seek the aid of the courts in obtaining admission to the public schools of their community on a nonsegregated basis. In each instance, they had been denied admission to schools attended by white children under laws requiring or permitting segregation according to race. This segregation was alleged to deprive the plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment” (U.S. Supreme Court, Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al., 1954).

Living under a government that protects the person and property of citizens, no exceptions

In Brown v Board of Education, Brown promotes living under a government that protects the person and property of citizens, no exception. The reason Brown promotes is that the Board of Education is hurting black students by segregating education and claiming equal education for all. As William Blackstone says, “This law of nature, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times. No human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid, derive all their authority, mediately, or immediately, from this original…. The principal aim of the society is to protect individuals in the enjoyment of those absolute rights, which were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature.” This means that everyone is equal, must possess equal rights, and their rights must be preserved. Black and white children were going to a different school because of the law that segregated them. Even though it says similar curriculum or education material, physical segregation creates unequal. Board of education is harming the black students and Brown is fighting against that law following equal protection guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment. So, Brown is promoting living under a government that protects the person and property of citizens, no exception because Board of education is not able to “protect individuals in the enjoyment of absolute rights which were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature”.

Living under a government that does not violate the person and property of citizens

In Brown v Board of education, Brown is promoting living under a government that does not violate the person and property of citizens. The reason Brown promotes is that the government is harming the black students. In this case, the government is doing injustice to the black kids by promoting segregated schools and black students have to go some miles away to the segregated school to get an education. William Blackstone says, “Upon these principles, the law of England abhors, and will not endure the existence of, slavery within this nation … And now it is laid down, that a slave or negro, the instant he lands in England, becomes a freeman; that is, the law will protect him in the enjoyment of his person, his liberty, and his property” (9B). This means that no one is a slave to another person, everyone is a free man and the government has to protect this law so that everyone consumes same right and maintain peace and harmony. In our case, the Government is trying to maintain equality by making the fourteen amendments, however, segregation in education questions equality. Brown fight for justice for his daughter and all the black daughters who were forced to send to segregated schools because of the unfair education system. Hence, Brown promotes living under a government that does not violate the person and property of citizens because that segregation made him feel “the existence of slavery within this nation”.

Religion

In Brown v Board of Education, religion does not apply because the government is not directly promoting the practice of religion in this case. This case is about an unfair education system that makes black children go to a segregated school for their education. Thomas Jefferson says, “And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever: that considering numbers, nature, and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest” (7A). This means that religion makes a person and property more secure. People follow religious thing in the fear that they may commit sin. So, religion helps people to achieve the goal of human life. Government has to promote the practice of religion. SO, this feature does not apply to this case because Brown is not suffering from “a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God”.

Personal Liberty

Brown is promoting personal liberty. The reason Brown is promoting is that Government is not letting people act freely as long as they don’t harm society. Brown children are forced to go to the segregated school and are not allowed to study together where white children studies. James Kent says, “The right of personal liberty is another absolute right of individuals, which has long been a favorite of the English law. It is not only a constitutional principle…that no person shall be deprived of his liberty without due process of law, but effectual provision is made against all unlawful restraint, or imprisonment, by the security of the privilege of habeas corpus….The right of deliverance from all unlawful imprisonment, to the full extent of the remedy provided by the habeas corpus act, is a common law right…” (70D). This means that government should not imprison a citizen without a trial, that is a person should not be wrongly imprisoned without trial. So, Brown is promoting liberty because he urges “no person shall be deprived of his liberty without due process of law”.

Self-government

In Brown v Board of Education, self-government does not apply and the reason is that both sides would let the people of the State live under the law made by their representatives in their legislature. Letter to the Inhabitants of Quebec by First Continental Congress mentions, “The first grand right, is that of the people having a share in their government by their representatives chosen by themselves, and in consequence, of being ruled by laws which they themselves approve, not by edicts of men over whom they have no control”. This means that self-government is chosen by people themselves which helps to protect their rights, create and maintain laws. People will live under the law made by their representatives. In self-government, rights will be more protected and representative focus on preserving cultural heritage and language more. Hence, this feature does not apply to this case, because Brown is not complaining about “the government by their representatives chosen by themselves”.