Barrows v. Jackson 346 U.S. 249 (1953)

views updated

BARROWS v. JACKSON 346 U.S. 249 (1953)

Following the decision in shelley v. kraemer (1948), state courts could no longer constitutionally enforce racially restrictive covenants by injunction. The question remained whether the covenants could be enforced indirectly, in actions for damages. In Barrows, white neighbors sued for damages against co-covenantors who had sold a home to black buyers in disregard of a racial covenant. The Supreme Court held that the sellers had standing to raise the equal protection claims on behalf of the black buyers, who were not in court, and went on to hold that the fourteenth amendment barred damages as well as injunctive relief to enforce racial covenants. Chief Justice fred m. vinson, who had written the Shelleyopinion, dissented, saying the covenant itself, "standing alone," was valid, in the absence of judicial ejectment of black occupants.

Kenneth L. Karst

About this article

Barrows v. Jackson 346 U.S. 249 (1953)

Updated About content Print Article