美国的政治人物和社会精英利用布朗案判决, 企图彰显资本主义民主制度的“优越性”, 吸引第三世界国家追随美国。此前, 严重的种族问题让美国民主实践黯然失色, 而布朗案判决似乎让美国士气大振。加州众议员帕特里克·希林格斯 (Patrick J.Hillings) 声称, “我们正在努力使所有种族、肤色和信仰的人相信, 他们应该加入美国这一边……因此, 在这个时刻, 布朗案判决特别受欢迎”。明尼苏达州参议员赫伯特·汉弗莱 (Hubert Humphrey) 称赞该判决是“迈向民主征途的又一大步”。 (4) 伊利诺伊州众议员威廉·道森 (William L.Dawson) 说:“我们声称是自由世界领袖, 布朗案判决通过展示我们宪法不分肤色、种族和信仰致力于保障民权的决心, 在这方面帮助去除了最大的污点”, 这是回击苏联宣传的“最好的答案”。 (5) 西弗吉尼亚州州立学院院长威廉·华莱士 (William J.L.Wallace) 表示, 该判决是“自《解放宣言》以来最重要的声明, 美国民主向前迈进了一大步”。 (6) 霍华德大学校长莫迪凯·约翰逊认为, 对作为“世界精神领袖”的美国而言, 布朗案判决堪称是“一个伟大的、富于建设性的转折点”。全国有色人种协进会的领导人怀特甚至宣称, “这个判决揭穿了……有关美国民主腐朽的谎言”。 (1) 美国的政治人物和精英人士不仅如释重负, 而且利用布朗案判决回击冷战对手, 向世界宣传美国在“民主和道德”上获得了“胜利”。
布朗案判决后, 虽然艾森豪威尔总统因个人理念而对该判决颇有微词, (2) 但共和党及其政府在利用该判决的国际影响力方面毫不迟疑。1954年5月21日, 共和党全国委员会发表声明称, 布朗案判决“刚好顺应了艾森豪威尔政府对国际共产主义的正面攻击……它有利于保障自由世界的伟大事业”。 (3) 共和党全国委员会少数族裔事务主任瓦尔·华盛顿 (Val Washington) 说:“这是一个重要历史时刻”, “在美国民主中, 对于所有的人来说, 都是一等公民”, “这个判决只可能在艾森豪威尔政府所创造的气氛中达成”。 (4) 艾森豪威尔重视挖掘布朗案判决的新闻价值和外交价值。尽管他认为在国内支持布朗案判决有一定的政治风险, 但“美国之音”向各国听众传播了他的道德信条和判决内容。 (5) 1956年10月, 艾森豪威尔安排首席大法官沃伦访问印度, 努力提升美印关系和争取中立国家的支持, 其主要考虑是沃伦因布朗案判决而在印度享有较高的声誉。 (6)
美国政府自然不会放过利用布朗案判决营造的国际舆论氛围, 重塑国家形象, 回击对手批评, 争取第三世界国家的支持。美国国务院认为, 布朗案判决对美国外交而言是一场胜利, 应该立即趁热打铁。 (7) 1953年, 艾森豪威尔重组了美国新闻署 (The United States Information Agency) , 以40种语言的播报来对抗24小时不间断的苏联宣传, 使其成为一个服务于美国利益的对外发声机构。 (8) 布朗案判决后, “美国之音”立即向欧洲播报这一重大判决的新闻, 因为有关国家一直对美国的种族隔离问题“大做文章”。 (9) 伴随着“硬新闻广播” (straight news broadcasts) (10) 的是“美国之音”所做的评论, 强调美国的种族隔离问题“是在民主程序下通过法律解决的, 而不是通过暴力统治或专制命令”。 (11) 在布朗案判决后的数小时内, “美国之音”用35种语言向全世界广播了这条新闻。 (12) 该判决成为了“美国之音”新闻节目关注的焦点。在随后的数天里, “美国之音”重点针对一些社会主义国家反复广播布朗案的判决内容, 试图改变在这些国家里“美国黑人仍然是奴隶和没有社会地位的公民的刻板形象”, 削弱他们的“反美宣传”。 (1)
布朗案判决更成为反击苏联的武器。《废除种族隔离的公民指南》 (Citizen’s Guide to De-Segregation) 评论道:“‘美国之音’把布朗案判决传播到全世界。数百位国内外领袖拍电报祝贺, 唯有莫斯科电台保持沉默。” (2) 美国驻意大利大使克莱尔·卢斯 (Clare B.Luce) 写道:“意大利公共舆论以极大的兴趣关注美国最高法院的布朗案判决及其后续发展。”他声称, 该判决“不仅再次提醒意大利人有关美国民主的意义, 而且瓦解了共产主义在这个问题上的反美宣传的基础”。美国驻苏联大使认为, 布朗案判决是“如此明显地反驳了共产主义的宣传”, 所以当地媒体很少对该判决进行报道。美国驻印度大使承认, “我们在印度有效地利用了这个判决”。美国新闻署声称, “在美国黑人作为公民稳步迈向充分平等的前进道路上”, 布朗案判决是“又一个重要里程碑”, 并计划在1954年学校秋季开学后, 向90个国家播放一部电影, 描绘马里兰州巴尔的摩市的白人学生和黑人学生一起上学的画面。 (3)
美国政府还利用布朗案判决向全世界重申致力于“自由和平等”。美国新闻署出版的《自由世界》 (Free World) 杂志刊登了题为《世界上最成功的故事》的文章, 讲述“举世瞩目”的布朗案判决, 庆祝美国在种族关系领域所取得的“伟大成就”。它声称, 在这么短的时间里, “一个民族从奴隶身份上升为平等的、负责任的公民和自由人”, 这是“举世罕见的”。 (4) 与此同时, 美国国务院和美国新闻署向世界展示一种“积极的”美国国家形象, 标榜美国民主作为一种政治制度, 在实现社会变革和个人自由方面“更具优势”。 (5)
结语
美国在冷战中以“世界领袖”自居, 极力向世界标榜美式价值。然而, 冷战背景却让美国无处不在的种族歧视与其宣称的“自由的生活方式”之间的巨大反差, 暴露在世界舞台的聚光灯下。美国不仅备受国内舆论的批评, 而且还饱受世界舆论, 特别是主要对手———苏联的嘲讽。战后亚非拉地区民族解放运动蓬勃开展, 大量黑人获得解放并建立主权国家, 而美国的黑人仍遭受歧视。显而易见, 种族问题极不利于美国拉拢这些新独立的国家。可以说, 美国对黑人民权政策的调整, 离不开亚非拉民族解放运动的推动, 同时也是苏联等社会主义阵营对美国斗争的结果。
为了改善国家形象, 提升国际声誉, 加强“自由的生活方式”在第三世界国家中的吸引力, 杜鲁门政府在多方压力下选择进行黑人民权改革, 并以此来改变美国南部州以种族问题绑架国家利益的格局。在布朗案中, 美国政府以“法庭之友”身份提交书面陈述, 呼吁最高法院考虑种族隔离和歧视问题对美国外交、国家安全和国家声誉的负面影响, 明确提出废除中小学教育中的种族隔离制度。
最高法院虽然未在布朗案的判决词中提及废除种族隔离制度是出于冷战的考虑, 但这一判决的形成过程表明, 冷战背景产生了重要影响。最高法院的大法官们对冷战时期“美国的两难困境”感受深刻。他们大多了解种族问题对美国外交造成了严重损害, 认识到解决种族问题对美国“世界领袖”地位的重要意义, 深知废除种族隔离制度对美国大有裨益。因此, 原先犹豫不决或持反对意见的大法官改变了立场, 九位大法官最终一致同意推翻“隔离但平等”的原则。
客观地说, 国际社会对布朗案判决的回应大多比较正面, 一定程度上减少了对美国种族问题的报道和批评。与此同时, 美国政府、新闻媒体、政治人物和社会精英纷纷利用这一判决, 向国际社会大肆宣扬美国民主制度的“优越性”, 赞颂美国不仅勇于正视自己的缺点, 而且有能力改正。美国黑人社会则利用有利的国际形势, 不仅在布朗案判决中取得了成果, 而且把民权运动转变成为一场“为了美国民主的救赎而展开的伟大运动”。 (1) 民权活动家们将美国民主与种族问题的国际意义紧密地联系起来, 推动美国政府真正致力于种族平等和正义, 而不是把重点放在冷战的政治考量上。 (2) 布朗案判决后, 全国有色人种协进会领导人怀特认为, 争取人类自由的工作并未结束, “胜利并非完全获得”, 下一个重要的工作是突破“贫民窟的铁幕”, 否则美国黑人无法充分享受该判决带来的成果。 (3) 实际上, 布朗案判决并没有真正解决“美国的两难困境”。但冷战历史背景确为美国黑人民权改革的进一步深入提供了契机。
注释（文献参考）：
1 布朗案一共包括五个案件, 分别选自南卡罗来纳州、弗吉尼亚州、堪萨斯州、特拉华州和哥伦比亚特区, 反映了种族隔离教育的普遍性和严重性。
2 “Brown v.Board of Education, 347U.S.483, 1954, ”Hein Online:U.S.Supreme Court Library. (该引文注释出自Hein Online (数据库) 的U.S.Supreme Court Library“美国最高法院资料库”数据库, 网址:http://heinonline.org/HOL/Index?collection=usreports.)
3 理查德·克鲁格和马克·塔什内特强调全国有色人种协进会 (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) 的司法斗争作用。克鲁格认为, 该组织实施谨慎的司法斗争战略, 通过长期的诉讼挑战种族隔离制度, 终于在布朗案判决中取得了废除种族隔离制度的胜利。 (参见Richard Kluger, Simple Justice:The History of Brown v.Board of Education and Black America’s Strugglef or Equality, New York:Alfred A.Knopf, 1976) 塔什内特把视野延伸至全国有色人种协进会早期的诉讼活动, 强调该组织早期的民权斗争对布朗案胜利的重要性。 (参见Mark V.Tushnet, The NAACP’s Legal Strategy against Segregated Education, 1925-1950, Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press, 1987) 凯文·麦克马洪从20世纪30年代美国总统权力扩张和改组最高法院的视角, 解释20世纪四五十年代最高法院在种族问题上的转变。 (参见Kevin J.McMahon, Reconsidering Roosevelt on Race:How the Presidency Paved the Road to Brown, Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 2004) 此外, 克莱曼认为, 种族关系中的政治环境和社会背景的变化, 是最高法院在布朗案中推翻“隔离但平等”原则的重要原因。 (参见Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, New York:Oxford University Press, 2004)
4 参见Derrick A.Bell, Jr., “Brown v.Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma, ”Harvard Law Review, vol.93, no.3, 1980.
5 “法庭之友”, 即法院的朋友, “指非诉讼当事人但对案件实质问题有重大利害关系, 主动申请或应法院要求而向法院提交书面意见的人”。需要说明的是, “在诸多的法庭之友的主体中, 美国的副检察总长发挥的作用最大, 在最高法院, 其几乎排他性地代表了执行部门和联邦政府”。参见肖永平、李韶华:《美国法庭之友制度的价值纬度与实证研究》, 《东方法学》2011年第4期, 第121、128页。
6 参见Mary L.Dudziak, “Brown as a Cold War Case, ”The Journal of American History, vol.91, no.1, 2004;Mary L.Dudziak, “Desegregation as a Cold War Imperative, ”Stanford Law Review, vol.41, no.1, 1988;Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, Princeton:Princeton University Press, 2000;Thomas Borstelmann, The Cold War and the Color Line:American Race Relations in the Global Arena, Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 2001;Azza Salama Layton, International Politics and Civil Rights Policies in the United States, 1941-1960, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2000;Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality.
7 Michael Goldfield, The Color of Politics:Race and the Mainsprings of American Politics, New York:The New Press, 1997, p.267.
8 Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma:The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy, New York:Harper&Brothers, 1944.该书问世后, 在1949年、1962年和1996年多次再版。本文引用的是1962年的版本。
9 缪尔达尔的《美国的两难困境:黑人问题与现代民主》一书是研究美国民主与种族问题的经典著作, 在美国引起了极大反响并产生了深远影响。参见Walter A.Jackson, Gunnar Myrdal and America’s Conscience:Social Engineering and Racial Liberalism, 1938-1987, Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press, 1990.
10 Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma:The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy, pp.1015, 1016.
11 Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, p.182.
12 Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma:The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy, p.1016.
13 王立新:《世界领导地位的荣耀和负担:信誉焦虑与冷战时期美国的对外军事干预》, 《中国社会科学》2016年第2期, 第182页。
14 Renee Romano, “Moving Beyond‘The Movement that Changed the World’:Bringing the History of the Cold War into Civil Rights Museums, ”The Public Historian, vol.31, no.2, 2009, p.35.
15 John David Skrentny, “The Effect of the Cold War on African-American Civil Rights:America and the World Audience, 1945-1968, ”Theory and Society, vol.27, no.2, 1998, p.248.
16 Rayford Logan, “The Negro and the Post-War World, ”in Herbert Aptheker, ed., A Documentary History of the Negro People in the United States from the Beginning of the New Deal to the End of the Second World War, 1933-1945, New York:Citadel Press, 1974, p.541.
17 Waldo E.Martin, Jr., ed., Brown v.Board of Education:A Brief History with Documents, Boston:Bedford/St.Martin’s, 1998, p.6.
18 Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, p.182.
19 David L.Sloss, “How International Human Rights Transformed the US Constitution, ”Human Rights Quarterly, vol.38, no.2, 2016, p.436.
20 Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, p.182.
21 James H.Meriwether, Proudly We Can Be Africans:Black Americans and Africa, 1935-1961, Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press, 2002, p.86.
22 FRUS, 1950, vol.1, p.264.
23 Mary L.Dudziak, “Desegregation as a Cold War Imperative, ”pp.80-81.
24 “Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1952, No.8, Oliver Brown, Et Al., Appellants v.Board of Education of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas, Et Al., ”p.7, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.该引用注释出自“Gale现代法律形成”数据库的“美国最高法院记录与摘要”模块, http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itweb/cnruc?bd=SCRB.
25 Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, p.183.
26 James H.Meriwether, Proudly We Can Be Africans:Black Americans and Africa, 1935-1961, p.85.
27 Department of State, Memorandum of Conversation, Subject:Alleged Discrimination against Haitian Agriculture Minister, November 14, 1947, Box 4438, Department of State Central Decimal File, Records Group 59, 811.4016/11-1247, National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, Maryland, USA.
28 Jack M.Balkin, “What‘Brown’Teaches Us about Constitutional Theory, ”Virginia Law Review, vol.90, no.6, 2004, p.1540.
29 转引自“Brief on Behalf of American Civil Liberties Union, American Ethical Union, American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, Japanese American Citizens League and Unitarian Fellowship for Social Justice as Amici Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1952, no.1, Oliver Brown, Mrs.Richard Lawton, Mrs.Sadie Emmanuel, Et Al., Appellants vs.Board of Education of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas, etc., Et Al., Appellees, ”pp.29, 30, 31, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
30 David L.Sloss, “How International Human Rights Transformed the US Constitution, ”p.430.
31 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.12, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:President Truman's Attempts to put the Principles of Racial Justice into Law, 1948-1950, Bethesda, MD:University Publications of America, 1996, pp.189-193.
32 George Streator, “Negro Congress Appeals to U.N.:Detroit Gathering asks it to Halt Oppression of the Race in this Country, ”New York Times (1923-Current file) , June 2, 1946, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times with Index, p.33.
33 George Streator, “U.N.Gets Charges of Wide Bias in U.S.:3 Centuries of Discrimination against Negroes cited in NAACP Plea for‘Justice’, ”New York Times (1923-Current file) , October 24, 1947, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times with Index, p.9.
34 George Streator, “Negroes to Bring Cause before U.N.:Statement Charges that South Offers Greater U.S.Threat than Soviet Activities, ”New York Times (1923-Current file) , October 12, 1947, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times with Index, p.52.
35 William C.Berman, The Politics of Civil Rights in the Truman Administration, Columbus:The Ohio State University Press, 1970, p.66.
36 Special to The New York Times, “U.S.Accused in U.N.of Negro Genocide, ”New York Times (1923-Current file) , December 18, 1951, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times with Index, p.13.
37 “Additional Brief of the American Federation of Teachers as Amicus Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1953, no.1, Oliver Brown, Et Al., Appellants vs.Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, etc., Et Al., Appellees, ”pp.25-26, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
38 “Brief for American Jewish Congress as Amicus Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1952, no.1, Oliver Brown, Mrs.Richard Lawton, Mrs.Sadie Emmanuel, Et Al., Appellants vs.Board of Education of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas, Et Al., ”p.2, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
39 “Brief on Behalf of American Civil Liberties Union, American Ethical Union, American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, Japanese American Citizens League, and Unitarian Fellowship for Social Justice as Amici Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1952, no.1, Oliver Brown, Mrs.Richard Lawton, Mrs.Sadie Emmanuel, Et Al., Appellants vs.Board of Education of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas, Et Al., Appellees, ”p.28, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
40 来自于哥伦比亚特区的诉讼案是博林诉夏普案 (Bolling v.Sharpe) 。
41 “Brief for Petitioners, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1952, no.4, Spottswood Thomas Bolling, Et Al., Petitioners v.C.Melvin Sharpe, Et Al., Respondents, ”p.65, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
42 James H.Meriwether, Proudly We Can Be Africans:Black Americans and Africa, 1935-1961, p.86.
43 王立新:《世界领导地位的荣耀和负担:信誉焦虑与冷战时期美国的对外军事干预》, 《中国社会科学》2016年第2期, 第201页。
44 转引自Alonzo L.Hamby, Beyond the New Deal:Harry S.Truman and American Liberalism, New York:Columbia University Press, 1973, p.115.
45 Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma:The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy, p.1021.
46 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.11, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:The Report of the Committee on Civil Rights and President Truman’s Message to Congress of February 2, Bethesda, MD:University Publications of America, 1996, p.726.
47 Thomas Borstelmann, The Cold War and the Color Line:American Race Relations in the Global Arena, p.270.
48 Renee Romano, “Moving Beyond‘The Movement that Changed the World’:Bringing the History of the Cold War into Civil Rights Museums, ”p.37.
49 Anthony Lester, “Brown v.Board of Education Overseas, ”Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol.148, no.4, 2004, p.456.
50 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.11, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:The Report of the Committee on Civil Rights and President Truman’s Message to Congress of February 2, pp.512, 761-762.
51 John Fousek, To Lead the Free World:American Nationalism and the Cultural Roots of the Cold War, Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press, 2000, p.137.
52 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.11, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:The Report of the Committee on Civil Rights and President Truman’s Message to Congress of February 2, pp.327, 328.
53 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.11, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:The Report of the Committee on Civil Rights and President Truman’s Message to Congress of February 2, p.512.
54 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.11, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:The Report of the Committee on Civil Rights and President Truman’s Message to Congress of February 2, pp.468, 505-516, 681.
55 Azza Salama Layton, International Politics and Civil Rights Policies in the United States, 1941-1960, pp.91, 92.
56 Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, p.88.
57 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.12, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:President Truman's Attempts to put the Principles of Racial Justice into Law, 1948-1950, pp.50-53.
58 Dennis Merrill, ed., Documentary History of the Truman Presidency, vol.11, The Truman Administration’s Civil Rights Program:The Report of the Committee on Civil Rights and President Truman’s Message to Congress of February 2, p.741.
59 艾奇逊认为, “这是十分明显的……美国存在的歧视少数族裔的问题, 是我们发展与其他国家关系的一个障碍。因此, 国务院有足够的理由期待, 公众和个人消除种族歧视的努力所取得的成效日益显著”。参见“Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1947, No.72, J.D.Shelley, Ethel Lee Shelley, His Wife, and Josephine Fitzgerald, Petitioners v.Louis Kraemer and Fern W.Kraemer, His Wife, ”p.20, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
60 “Brief for the United States, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1949, no.25, Elmer W.Henderson, Appellant v.The United States of America, Interstate Commerce Commission and Southern Railway Company, ”pp.60, 62, 63, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
61 “Memorandum for the United States as Amicus Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1949, no.34, G.W.McLaurin, Appellant v.Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma Et Al., ”pp.11, 12, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
62 王希:《原则与妥协:美国宪法的精神与实践》, 北京:北京大学出版社, 2014年, 第465—466页。
63 “Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1952, no.8, Oliver Brown, Et Al., Appellants v.Board of Education of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas, Et Al., ”pp.4, 5, 6, The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
64 “Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae, in the Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1952, no.8, Oliver Brown, Et Al., Appellants v.Board of Education of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas, Et Al., ”pp.17, 26, 31.The Making of Modern Law:U.S.Supreme Court Records and Briefs, 1832-1978.
65 Mary L.Dudziak, “Desegregation as a Cold War Imperative, ”p.113.
66 1896年, 最高法院对该案的判决意味着“隔离但平等”的原则符合宪法, 从法律上确立了种族隔离制度。
67 Alfred H.Kelly, Winfred A.Harbison, and Herman Belz, The American Constitution:Its Origins and Development, vol.2, New York:Norton, 1991, pp.586-587.
68 “Brown v.Board of Education, 347U.S.483, 1954, ”Hein Online:U.S.Supreme Court Library.
69 “Brown v.Board of Education, 347U.S.483, 1954, ”Hein Online:U.S.Supreme Court Library.
70 Lucas A.Powe, Jr., The Warren Court and American Politics, Cambridge:The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2000, p.31.
71 Mimi C.Gronlund, Supreme Court Justice Tom C.Clark:A Life of Service, Austin:University of Texas, 2010, p.185.
72 Lucas A.Powe, Jr., The Warren Court and American Politics, pp.41-42.
73 William O.Douglas, Strange Lands and Friendly People, New York:Harper&Brothers, 1951, p.296.
74 William O.Douglas, Strange Lands and Friendly People, p.321.
75 Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, pp.105-106.
76 Luther A.Huston, “Sense of Justice Held World Need:Warren at Judicial Meeting Sees U.S.Equality Concepts Serving as Aid to Peace, ”New York Times (1923-Current file) , June 30, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times, p.8.
77 Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, p.106.
78 1953年9月8日, 文森突然病故, 艾森豪威尔总统随后提名沃伦为首席大法官。
79 法官伯顿为共和党人。
80 Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, p.195.
81 Nancy Beck Young, ed., Documentary History of the Dwight D.Eisenhower Presidency, vol.1, The Eisenhower Administration and the Brown v.Board of Education Decision, 1954-1955, LexisNexis, 2005, p.10.
82 Philip Elman and Norman Silber, “The Solicitor General’s Office, Justice Frankfurter, and Civil Rights Litigation, 1946-1960:An Oral History, ”Harvard Law Review, vol.100, no.4, 1987, pp.817, 845.
83 法兰克福特向最高法院提交了这一建议, 该建议有利于1954年布朗案判决获得一致通过, 并在1955年被布朗案第二判决采纳。参见Philip Elman and Norman Silber, “The Solicitor General’s Office, Justice Frankfurter, and Civil Rights Litigation, 1946-1960:An Oral History, ”pp.827, 828.
84 Philip Elman and Norman Silber, “The Solicitor General’s Office, Justice Frankfurter, and Civil Rights Litigation, 1946-1960:An Oral History, ”p.823.
85 James E.St.Clair and Linda C.Gugin, Chief Justice Fred M.Vinson of Kentucky:A Political Biography, Lexington:The University Press of Kentucky, 2002, pp.303-304.
86 Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, p.210.
87 Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, p.106.
88 Michael J.Klarman, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights:The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality, p.298.
89 WHR[William H.Rehnquist, law clerk to Justice Jackson], “A Random Thought on the Segregation Cases, ”Box 184, Robert H.Jackson Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress.
90 From Douglas’s conference notes in Brown v.Board of Education, December 13, 1952, pp.1-2, case file:Segregation Cases, Box 1150, William O.Douglas Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress.
91 Justice Jackson’s conferences notes, Segregation Cases, December 12, 1952, Box 184, Robert H.Jackson Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress.
92 Memorandum for the Conference re:Segregation Cases, May 27, 1953, Box A27, Tom C.Clark Papers, Tarleton Law Library, University of Texas.
93 Sheldon Goldman, Constitutional Law and Supreme Court Decision-Making:Cases and Essays, New York:Harper&Row, 1982, p.427.
94 Douglas conference notes, Briggs v.Elliott, December 12, 1953, pp.1-3, case file:Segregation Cases, Box 1149, William O.Douglas Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress.
95 Jackson draft concurrence, School Segregation Cases, March 15, 1954, pp.1, 22-23, case file:Segregation Cases, Box 184, Robert H.Jackson Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress.
96 EBP[E.Barrett Prettyman]to Jackson, pp.1, 3, Box 184, Robert H.Jackson Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress.
97 Frankfurter to“Stanley”[Reed], May 20, 1954, Stanley F.Reed Papers, Special Collections and Archives, University of Kentucky Libraries.
98 James H.Meriwether, Proudly We Can Be Africans:Black Americans and Africa, 1935-1961, p.86.
99 Frankfurter, Memorandum (first draft) , p.3, Felix Frankfurter Papers, part 2, reel 4, Microfilm, Frederick, Md.:University Publications of America, 1986.
100 Earl Warren, The Memoirs of Chief Justice Earl Warren, Garden City, N.Y.:Doubleday and Company, 1977, p.3.
101 Olivia Pearl Stokes to Douglas, June 2, 1954, Box 1150, William O.Douglas Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress.
102 Mrs.William Thomas Mason to Douglas, June 4, 1954, Box 1150, William O.Douglas Papers, Manuscripts Division, Library of Congress.
103 The Associated Press, “U.S.Supreme Court Ruling Evokes Worldwide Acclaim, ”The Christian Science Monitor, May 19, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Christian Science Monitor, p.5.
104 Charles Franklin, “Milestone in American Negroes Progress towards Equality, ”The Times of India (1861-Current) , May 30, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Times of India, p.8.
105 Max Freedman, “The American Advance:Negro Student Rights, ”The Times of India (1861-current) , June 2, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Times of India, p.6.
106 The Associated Press, “U.S.Supreme Court Ruling Evokes Worldwide Acclaim, ”The Christian Science Monitor, May 19, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Christian Science Monitor, p.5.
107 Foreign Service Despatch, No.248, From:Amcongen, Dakar, French West Africa, To:The Department of State, Washington, Subject:Local Reaction to Decision of the United States Supreme Court Outlawing Segregation in the Schools, May 26, 1954, Box 4687, Department of State Central Decimal File, Records Group 59, 811.411/5-2654, National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, Maryland, USA.
108 Foreign Service Despatch, No.1498, From:Amembassy, Rio de Janeiro, To:The Department of State, Washington, Subject:Santos Council Applauds U.S.Supreme Court Decision, June 2, 1954, Box 4687, Department of State Central Decimal File, Records Group 59, 811.411/6-254, National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, Maryland, USA.
109 The Associated Press, “U.S.Supreme Court Ruling Evokes Worldwide Acclaim, ”The Christian Science Monitor, May 19, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Christian Science Monitor, p.5.
110 From Our Own Correspondent, “Education of The Negro, ”The Times (London, England) , May 18, 1954;该引文注释出自Glae“《泰晤士报》数字典藏数据库, 1785—2010” (The Times Digital Archive, 1785-2010) , 网址:http://gale.cengage.co.uk/times.aspx/.
111 Don Iddon, “Nine Judges Light a Freedom Lamp, ”Daily Mail (London, England) , May 19, 1954, 该引文注释出自Glae“《每日邮报》数字典藏数据库, 1896—2004” (Daily Mail Historical Archive, 1896-2004) , 网址:http://gale.cengage.co.uk/daily-mail-historical-archive.aspx.
112 The Associated Press, “U.S.Supreme Court Ruling Evokes Worldwide Acclaim, ”The Christian Science Monitor, May 19, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Christian Science Monitor, p.5.
113 Mary L.Dudziak, “Brown as a Cold War Case, ”p.36.
114 转引自Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, p.109.
115 转引自Mary L.Dudziak, “Brown as a Cold War Case, ”p.37.
116 “Editorial Excerpts from the Nation’s Press on Segregation Ruling, ”New York Times (1857-Current file) , May 18, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times, p.19.
117 “Editorial Excerpts from the Nation’s Press on Segregation Ruling, ”New York Times (1857-Current file) , May 18, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times, p.19.
118 “Editorial Excerpts from the Nation’s Press on Segregation Ruling, ”New York Times (1857-Current file) , May 18, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The New York Times, p.19.
119 Roscoe Drummond, “Segregation Ruled Un-American:Decision said to Reflect Democracy as it is Urged on Nearer to Perfection, ”Birmingham News, May 20, 1954, p.16.
120 Robert C.Albright, “Southerners Assail High Court Ruling, ”The Washington Post and Times Herald (1954-1959) , May 18, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Washington Post, p.1.
121 “Feeling of Victory Surges up from All over the Nation, ”The Richmond Afro American, May 22, 1954, p.8.
122 Chalmers M.Roberts, “South’s Leaders are Shocked at School Integration Ruling, ”The Washington Post and Times Herald (1954-1959) , May 18, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Washington Post, p.2.
123 “Feeling of Victory Surges up from All over the Nation, ”The Richmond Afro American, May 22, 1954, p.8.
124 Earl Warren, The Memoirs of Chief Justice Earl Warren, p.291.
125 Mary L.Dudziak, “Desegregation as a Cold War Imperative, ”p.115.
126 “Feeling of Victory Surges up from All over the Nation, ”The Richmond Afro American, May 22, 1954, p.8.
127 John David Skrentny, “The Effect of the Cold War on African-American Civil Rights:America and the World Audience, 1945-1968, ”p.253.
128 Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, p.106.
129 Lucas A.Powe, Jr., The Warren Court and American Politics, p.36.
130 John David Skrentny, “The Effect of the Cold War on African-American Civil Rights:America and the World Audience, 1945-1968, ”p.253.
131 Chalmers M.Roberts, “South’s Leaders are Shocked at School Integration Ruling, ”The Washington Post and Times Herald (1954-1959) , May 18, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:The Washington Post, p.2.
132 “硬新闻广播”, 一般指的是题材比较严肃, 具有一定时新性的客观事实报道。
133 Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, p.107.
134 C.Vann Woodward, The Strange Career of Jim Crow, Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1974, p.132.
135 Mary L.Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights:Race and the Image of American Democracy, p.107.
136 Albert P.Blaustein and Clarence Clyde Ferguson, Jr., Desegregation and the Law:The Meaning and Effect of the School Segregation Cases, New York:Vintage Books, 1962, p.13.
137 Mary L.Dudziak, “Brown as a Cold War Case, ”pp.36, 37.
138 转引自Andrew L.Yarrow, “Selling a New Vision of America to the World:Changing Messages in Early U.S.Cold War Print Propaganda, ”Journal of Cold War Studies, vol.11, no.4, 2009, pp.29-30.
139 Brenda Gayle Plummer, ed., Window on Freedom:Race, Civil Rights, and Foreign Affairs, 1945-1988, Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press, 2003, p.183.
140 John Fousek, To Lead the Free World:American Nationalism and the Cultural Roots of the Cold War, pp.145-146.
141 Thomas Borstelmann, The Cold War and the Color Line:American Race Relations in the Global Arena, p.94.
142 “‘Atlanta Declaration’Maps Program to End Segregation:Crowd Hears NAACP Leaders on Sunday in South-Wide Meet, ”Atlanta Daily World (1932-2003) , May 25, 1954, ProQuest Historical Newspapers:Atlanta Daily World, p.1.
《冷战与黑人民权改革:国际史视野下的布朗案判决》附论文PDF版下载：
http://www.lunwensci.com/uploadfile/2018/0727/20180727074848814.pdf
关注SCI论文创作发表，寻求SCI论文修改润色、SCI论文代发表等服务支撑，请锁定SCI论文网！
文章出自SCI论文网转载请注明出处：https://www.lunwensci.com/lishilunwen/253.html
