caa a22 4500 378872427 CHVBK 20180305123412.0 cr unu---uuuuu 161128e20030529xx s 000 0 eng 10.2202/1539-8323.1014 doi (NATIONALLICENCE)gruyter-10.2202/1539-8323.1014 Smith Rogers M. 1University of Pennsylvania "Black" and "White" in Brown: Equal Protection and the Legal Construction of Racial Identities [Elektronische Daten] [Rogers M. Smith] Owen Fiss's classic essay rightly argues that equal protection should be used to address systemic group disadvantages. It speaks, however, of racial groups as "natural" social groups, not rooted in biology, but also not created by specific legal rules. Yet American laws have always played a large role in constructing racial identities, and they have continued to do so even in the wake of Brown v. Board of Education, which sought to eliminate all legal expression of claims of racial superiority. By presenting blacks as profoundly damaged by segregation, Brown's reasoning still permitted assumptions of white superiority to continue. By recognizing that the law has been a major contributor to racial identities, and that American laws have constructed both white and black racial identities in harmful ways, we can articulate more fully how greater equality for racial groups would advance equal protection goals and genuinely benefit all. ©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston The Origins and Fate of Antisubordination Theory nationallicence Issues in Legal Scholarship De Gruyter 2/1(2003-05-29) 2:1 2003 2 ils https://doi.org/10.2202/1539-8323.1014 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.2202/1539-8323.1014 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Smith Rogers M. 1University of Pennsylvania NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Issues in Legal Scholarship De Gruyter 2/1(2003-05-29) 2:1 2003 2 ils CC0 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0 nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-gruyter