The issue of race in the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United States : the evolving interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause

This thesis entitled The Issue of Race in the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United States: The Evolving Interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause analyses the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in particular the following decisions: Plessy v. Ferguson, Sweatt v. Painter, Brown v. Board of Education, Topeka, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Grutter v. Bollinger, Gratz v. Bollinger, Fisher v. University of Texas and Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action. The analysis of the above- mentioned decisions illustrates the evolution of the philosophical background of the Supreme Court. After the Second World War, the natural-law legal philosophy began influencing the Justices and slightly overshadowed the positive-law current that was predominant in the pre- War era, in particular in the 19th century. This new philosophical background of the High Court help to constitutionally entrench the affirmative action policies by Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke and particularly by Grutter. However, the natural-law current has never become as dominant as the positive-law one in the 19th century, and as shown in Grutter's companion case of Gratz..