![](https://reason.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Brown-v-Board-2-300x170.jpeg)
![](https://reason.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Brown-v-Board-2-300x170.jpeg)
This year marks the 70th anniversary of our founding. Brown v. Board of Education, perhaps the Supreme Court's most iconic decision.of American Law and Equality Journal has published a symposium on this topic, of which I am one of the participants. A draft of my contribution entitled “brownDemocracy, and Foot Vote” was held. Available at SSRN. Here is the summary:
Traditional evaluation brownThe relationship between democracy and popular control of government should be strengthened by considering how we have strengthened the people's ability to „vote with their feet'' and not just at the ballot box. brown played a valuable role in strengthening foot voting. This has important implications for understanding this decision and its legacy.
The first part of the article summarizes the relationship between foot voting and ballot box voting and how the former has important advantages over the latter as a mechanism of political choice. Compared to voting at the ballot box, foot voting offers individuals and families a greater opportunity to make informed and decisive choices. There are also special benefits for ethnic minorities, including black people.
Part II examines traditional attempts at reconciliation. brown He appealed to democracy by arguing that the decision actually „strengthened representation.“ Each has advantages, but also significant limitations. Among other defects, they are often brown The incident itself famously stemmed from a challenge to racial segregation in Topeka, Kansas, where blacks had long had the right to vote, unlike much of the South. .
Part 3 explains how our understanding expands. brown Including the opportunity to vote with your feet fills a gaping hole in traditional efforts to reconcile decisions with democratic choice. Among other benefits, the rationale for foot voting is: brown This law allows targeted ethnic or racial groups to form political alliances with other groups, regardless of whether racial minorities have the right to vote or whether segregation laws are motivated by good or bad intentions. Applies regardless of whether it can be formed or not.
Part IV discusses the implications of legitimizing foot voting. brown Judicial review of other policies that prohibit foot voting, especially if those policies have a history of illegitimate racial motivations. The most important of these is exclusive zoning.
As stated in the article, create a paper that looks like this: brown Being new and useful is a tall order. Few other judicial decisions have been analyzed in such detail. But, as the saying goes, „Where a wise man would fear to tread, a fool rushes.“ So I accepted the journal's invitation.
Comments, suggestions and criticisms are welcome.