The Case Simkins vs. Cone (1963), Term Paper Example

Abstract

The case Simkins v. Cone (1963) emerged from an 1883 Supreme Court Declaration stating that the Equal Protection clause was applicable for government entities. Private groups and organizations were not obligated to legally confirm to the regulations specified therein as was enforced through judgment gained in the Civil Rights Cases (1883). This 1883 precedent became the law and was enforced until a reversal through Supreme Court decision in the cases Sweatt v. Painter (1950), Brown v. Board of Education (1954), and Simkins v. Cone (1963) (Thomas & Powell, 2006). The following pages of this document will examine various aspects of this decision as it relates to health care accessibility in United States of America during segregation

Introduction

During the early 1960s when segregation was practiced in the United States of America there were just nine hospitals available for African Americans in North Carolina. They were often very overcrowded and generally the quality of healthcare ranged from terrible to atrocious.  Historian Karen Thomas (2006) in researching the quality of health and its structure contended that, ‘Most hospitals in North Carolina and throughout the South did not accept black patients on an equal basis and did not allow black physicians to admit patients or train as interns’ ( Thomas, 2006, p 12).

The main issue was that while the majority of these hospitals were privately owned and refused to treat African Americans they functioned using government funds. Consequently, a precedent developed as it pertained to their civil rights towards receiving quality healthcare from the government. As was reported in the history Moses H. Cone Memorial and Wesley Long Community Hospital were two health care facilities located in Greensboro (Thomas, 2006).

Importantly, they were recipients of state and federal funds through the Hill-Burton Hospital Survey and Construction Act of 1946. Subsequently, George Simkins and a number of African American doctors along with patients filed a law suit against these two Piedmont hospitals contending that the facilities discriminated against blacks by refusing to receive and treat them at the hospitals (Thomas, 2006).

At what level of the judicial court system did this legal opinion occur?

The plaintiffs lost their case at the level of U.S. District Court of the Fourth Circuit. Relentlessly, they subsequently filed an appeal with the U.S Court of Appeals. Fortunately, in 1963 November, the previous court decision was over turned. To the dismay of the hospital management, the appellate court discovered that these hospitals were in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (Desegregating Hospitals, 2013).

Precisely, it was proven by the court that these hospitals were indirectly attached to the government by receiving financing through the Hill-Burton funds. Additionally, the court further discovered that they did not only discriminate against blacks, but these two Greensboro hospitals also violated the Constitution. At the time when segregation was enforced in America health care facilities for blacks were separate from whites with whites enjoying a far higher quality of health care than blacks. Clearly, this was inequality and injustice (Desegregating Hospitals, 2013)

What was the opinion of the lower court that was finally overturned in Simkins?

Despite the vigorous petitioning by these doctors on 5^th December 1962, U.S. District Court of the Fourth Circuit through Judge Stanley opinioned that the hospitals were corrects in discriminating against black patients, decided in the hospitals’ favor. Judge Stanley’s contention was that Moses H. Cone and Wesley Long were not government facilities rather they were privately owned businesses. Referencing The Civil Rights Cases (1883) Judge Stanley confirmed that they did not violate the rights of black patients by refusing them care (Desegregating Hospitals, 2013)

Explain at least one the federal laws that was highlighted in Simkins v. Moses H. Cone.

The federal laws highlighted in Simkins v Moses H. Cone case was the same ones challenged in the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883). They all emerged from The Civil Rights Act of 1875 (18 Stat. 335-337). It was often referred to as the Enforcement Act or Force Act. Importantly, this United States federal law was developed during the Reconstruction Era. Precisely, it assured African Americans equal treatment in public accommodations, public transportation, and prohibited exclusion from jury services.  However, the Supreme Court in 1883 through a series of Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) declared that this act was unconstitutional (Tsesis, 2004).

The fourteenth Amendment was another piece of federal legislation that was prominently argued in this case. There are five sections to this law. According to legal analysts the second, third and fourth sections were seldom challenged. Section five gave congress power to enforce provisions granted in the amendment. However, section one dealing with the Citizenship; privileges or Immunities; due process and equal protection clauses was the mostly litigated section. Precisely, it was highlighted in the Simkins v. Moses H. Cone case (Tsesis, 2004).

How did the federal law play a role in deciding this case?

After these two hospitals lost their bid in court to continually discriminate against black patients they reacted by filing a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court. In response to the petition Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy filed a brief for Simkins and plaintiffs involved in the mitigation. The case was denied in the Supreme Court. Historian Karen Kruse Thomas (2006), explained that the decision emerging from Simkins v. Cone (1963) case for the first time showed how application of federal laws by the courts can significantly play a role in decisions derived from a court hearing (Thomas, 2006).

In this case through application of the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibiting racial discrimination by a private entity (Encyclopedia of N.C., p. 1038) the federal court was able to make a decision in favor of Simkins and the black patients who were discriminated against. Subsequently within the next year this ground breaking court decision led the way for Congress passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, officially preventing hospitals across the county like Moses H. Cone Memorial and Wesley Long Community Hospital from discriminating against blacks by refusing to treat them due to the color of their skin (Thomas, 2006).

Identify and discuss the Constitutional amendments and issues in the case.

The greatest challenges related to constitutional amendment issues in this particular case were when the Supreme Court of the United States  unanimously rendered the civil rights Act of 1875 unconstitutional in presiding over the Civil Rights Cases (1883) with Justice John Marshall Harlan providing the lone dissent. The Court upheld the Equal Protection Clause contained in Fourteenth Amendment contending that while it prohibits discrimination through state entities federal government did not have the power to execute the jurisdiction of prohibiting private individuals from discriminating practices (Atwell, 2012).

In a ridiculous sentimental decision the Court contended that provisions contained in Thirteenth Amendment were merely a design for removing the stigma of slavery. However, it had nothing to do with prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations. Essentially, this 1875 Civil Rights Act the last civil rights bill signed that became law in United States until   the 1957 Civil Rights Act (Atwell, 2012).

Explain why the case was limited in its reach.

The case was limited its reach because it contained within the State of North Carolina. Even though other states might have had the same discrimination issues at the time it did not attract national support

Identify the federal official and agency that finally extended the cases’ ruling

Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy assisted the plaintiffs by filing a brief and the NAACP also supported by hiring a NAACP attorney by the name of Conrad Pearson, an NAACP attorney from Durham, to file the petition to federal district court on their behalf (Thomas, 2006).

How the cases’ outcome spread across the Nation.

After Applying the Equal Opportunity Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Section 1 to remove these discriminatory actions against blacks executed by these two North Carolina Hospitals Congress passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which officially prevented hospitals across the county like Moses H. Cone Memorial and Wesley Long Community from treating blacks less than humans as it related to their health care (Thomas, 2006). .

Conclusion

The foregoing case analysis of Simkins v. Moses H. Cone  is a brief, but comprehensive account of African Americans’ struggle for quality/equality in health care. It is proof that health care in American has never been universal neither equally distributed among its citizens. It is the worse among developed nations in the twenty first century. Could health care reform under ObamaCare remedy this obvious discrimination that still exists? We would just have to wait and see.

References

Atwell,  W. (2012). Wilbur R. Miller, ed. Civil Rights Act of 1875: The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America: An Encyclopedia. SAGE

Desegregating Hospitals (2013) Learn NC – North Carolina Digital History, Achieving Civil Rights, 1960 – 1965. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Thomas. K., & Powell, W. (2006).  Simkins v. Cone. Encyclopedia of North Carolina (University of North Carolina Press.

Tsesis, A. (2004). The Thirteenth Amendment and American Freedom: A Legal History; New York University Press.