Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
DOCUMENTARY EXAMINES FIRST SCHOOL-SEGREGATION RULING Before Brown v. Board of Education, there was Mendez v. Westminster. The little-known Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling from 1947 held that the school segregation of Mexican-American children in the Southwest was unconstitutional. But it may not stay unknown for long. Documentary filmmaker Sandra Robbie presented her film, “Mendez v. Westminster: For All the Children/Para Todos Los Ninos,” on the historic ruling on May 8 at the same San Francisco courthouse where attorneys argued the case on appeal 60 years ago. Bingham McCutchen and California La Raza Lawyers hosted the film screening, along with a discussion with the daughter of the lead plaintiff, Sylvia Mendez, who testified at the trial in 1945. The Mendez case, which originated in four Orange County school districts, was the first time a court decided that “separate is never equal,” according to Christopher Arriola, a member of the California La Raza Lawyers who organized the event. It was also the first time attorneys used the negative socialization theory to prove that separate schools violated the 14th Amendment. Plaintiffs’ attorney David Marcus had brought in expert witnesses and Mexican American children to show that segregation was harmful to the children. Thurgood Marshall, who would later win the Brown case, filed an amicus curiae brief supporting the plaintiffs on behalf of the NAACP. A month after the appellate ruling, then-Gov. Earl Warren overturned state legislation that had permitted the segregation of Asian-Americans and Native Americans in California. Now, Robbie and Mendez are working on getting the case into the state curriculum. Last month, the U.S. Postal Service unveiled a new 41-cent stamp commemorating the ruling.

Millie Lapidario

DEVIL IN THE (LEGAL) DETAILS Harold Justman has always been a fan of Ambrose Bierce’s “The Devil’s Dictionary,” a satirical 1911 book that lampooned the English language. But the San Mateo solo practitioner felt there was room � indeed, a need � for a legal version. So the “The Devil’s Law Dictionary” was born. It’s not on paper, though. Instead, it’s an Internet posting of Justman’s humorously twisted definitions of 66 common legal terms. The real estate lawyer began compiling them about a year ago and with the help of Berkeley’s Nolo Press debuted www.devilslawdictionary.com about three weeks ago, and it will grow over time. “It was just a fun little literary project of mine,” the 57-year-old said last week. “I hope people find it diverting and amusing.” Among Justman’s definitions:

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.