Lawyer Tom Mullikin, based in Camden, South Carolina, intends to bring a unique request before the U.S. Supreme Court: renaming the renowned Brown v. Board of Education case. Mullikin is collaborating with a group advocating for the case to be renamed Briggs v. Elliott, after the case that was filed in Clarendon County, South Carolina, in May 1950. This effort aims to challenge the long-standing separate-but-equal doctrine.
The Post and Courier reports that Briggs v. Elliott was one of the five cases consolidated under the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision in May 1954. Mullikin argues that the Supreme Court departed from its usual naming convention when it designated the consolidated cases as Brown v. Board of Education.
Mullikin says, “This is a breach of the court’s precedents. There’s absolutely nothing in the record that would support this case being named Brown v. Board.” Thurgood Marshall, one of the lawyers involved in the Briggs case, later argued the Brown v. Board of Education case before the Supreme Court. Initially, the plaintiffs in Briggs sought equality in education, but they later amended their lawsuit to demand desegregated schools.
Records from the South Carolina archives, cited by the Post and Courier, revealed stark disparities in funding between white and Black students. The defendant school district was spending $179 per white student but only $43 per Black student. Nathaniel Briggs, the son of Harry Briggs—the plaintiff in the Briggs case who was fired from his job as a gas station attendant for advocating equal resources for Black students—is among those supporting the name change. The Briggs family’s school lacked indoor plumbing and funding for a school bus. Additionally, Nathaniel Briggs’ mother lost her job at a motel.
Let us connect you with the best job opportunities – submit your resume to BCG Attorney Search now.
For Briggs, the mission to rename the case is deeply personal and represents his life’s work. He aims to shed light on the story and advocate for a change in the case’s name. Cecil Williams, a prominent civil rights photographer from South Carolina, also supports the name change. Williams noted that the Supreme Court has never renamed a case that has already been decided. Acknowledging that some may deem the request as unconventional or unlikely to succeed, Williams expressed his belief in the name change, as it addresses what he sees as the appropriation of a group’s legacy, history, and heritage.
As this unique legal endeavor unfolds, how the U.S. Supreme Court will respond to the group’s proposal to rename the historic Brown v. Board of Education case remains to be seen. While some may view it skeptically or dismiss it outright, Mullikin, Briggs, Williams, and their supporters are committed to challenging precedent and striving to accurately represent the case’s origins and significance.