The story of Brown v. Board of Education is a half-century old now and has been retold many times by historians, legal scholars, sociologists, and others. This collection of persuasive scholarly essays examines, for the first time, the role rhetorical theory played in the development of educational segregation. Contributors consider the NAACP’s development of a series of graduate school cases to challenge Plessy, analyze the Brown decision itself, assess the state response to Brown, and critique the two Supreme Court decisions implementing the Brown decision. By illustrating how rhetorical strategies created, sustained, challenged, and, ultimately, reversed educational segregation in the United States, this work demonstrates the real value of the rhetorical perspective and provides encouragement to those who wish to help further develop this emerging field of judicial rhetoric.

Contributions by: Ann E. Burnette, David Droge, Ann M. Gill, Marouf Hasian, Daniel Mangis