JenniferAlvarez

May19,2016
2ndperiod

YoureaLawyer!

Imageyoureinthepositionofawomanwhocomeshomefromworking.Youfoughtall
daytogetthemoneyyourefamilyisinneedof.Yourhusbanddidthattoo,beforehepassed
away.Yousawyourhusbandbeathimselfupeverysingledaytoearnthemoneyyouusedto
buyanewhomefortherestofyourfamily.Youcomehometothemalltogether.Youheara
storyaboutamanstoppingbyandlookingforyou.Youaskwhothemanwasandyouretold
thathewaspartoftheClybourneParkImprovementAssociation.Yourchildrentellyouthathe
wasofferingmoneytobuythehousefromyoujustbecausethecommunitywantstobeableto
raisetheirchildreninanenvironmentthatisrightforthem,andonlythem.Doyouknowthe
soundofinjustice?LenaYoungerdoes.Shewilltellyouitsoundslikesomeonetryingtobuy
youoff.Shewilltellyouitsoundslikesegregation.Shewilltellyouitsoundslikeracism!The
worryandprideshefeltwillneverbetakenback.Nowthestatewantstoputasidethefactthat
theYoungers14thamendmentwasviolatedwiththisproposaldoneByKarlLindner.The
evidenceinthiscasewillprovethatthis,infact,istrue.
WehaveseencaseslikethesebeforewheresegregationplaysabigrolesuchasinBrown
v.BoardofEducation.Duringthe1950s,schoolsweresegregated.InTopeka,Kansas,Linda
Brownandhersister,Terrylynn,hadtostruggletogettoschooleachdayinordertogettotheir
allblackelementaryschool.AroundBrown'shouse,therewasanallwhiteschool.Segregation
wasexperiencenotonlyinTopekabutinorderplacesthroughouttheSouth.Segregationwas

legalduetothePlessyv.FergusoncasethatCongressstateddidnotviolatethe14thamendment
anddidnotviolatetheconstitution.TheBrownfamilydisagreedwiththisstatementmadeby
CongressandbelievedthattheConstitutionwasbeingviolatedduetosegregation.TheBrowns
casewasfirstheardinthefederaldistrictcourtandtheydecidedthatsegregationinpublic
educationwasharmfulforblackstudents.However,theydecidedthatsegregationstillremained
legalbecauseAllblackschoolscontainedthesamethingsastheAllwhiteschools(Separatebut
equal).TheBrownsopinionremainedthesame,therefore,theytooktheircasetotheSupreme
court.TheBrownswonthecaseagainstsegregationbecausetheSupremecourtbelievedthata
studentneededgoodeducationandopportunitiesinordertosucceedandsegregationinschools
didntprovidethat.TheSupremeCourtruledthatsegregationinschoolsdeniedAfrican
Americanstheequalprotectionoflawsguaranteedbythe14thamendment.ThiscaseinKansas
canconnecttoMrs.Youngerscase.IftheYoungerfamilyarestuckinablackneighborhood
wherelittletonoopportunitiesareprovidedforbettersuccess,howwilltheybesuccessfulat
all?IftheYoungerfamilyarestruckdealingwithracismandsegregationinwhite
neighborhoods,howwilltheyhaveabetterchanceatabetterlife?IftheYoungerfamilyis
deniedequalopportunities,isntthatconsideredtheviolationofthe14thamendment?
BeneathaYoungerandWalterYoungerwillbethewitnessestothiscase.Beneatha
YoungerwillbethefirsttocomeuptothestandandtalkaboutherexperiencewithMr.Karl
Lindner.Theydontdoitlikethatanymore.HetalkedBrotherhood.Hesaideveryoneoughtto
learnhowtositdownandhateeachotherwithgoodChristianfellowship(121).Thisstatement
madebyBeneathaprovesthatMr.LindnerclearlyapproachestheYoungerfamily.Thenext
persontocomeuptothestandisWalterYounger.Hesaidtheycanthardlywait.Hesaidthe

onethingtheydonthave,thattheyjustdyingtohaveoutthereisafinefamilyoffinecolored
people!(120).ThissarcasticstatementmadebyWalterprovesthatMr.Lindnerwasnotdying
tohaveacoloredfamilyinhiscommunity.Theonlywaytogetridofthecoloredfamilywasto
buythehousebackandtakeawaytheopportunitiestheYoungershadinthathousehold.Taking
awaythehousewouldkeepsegregationinawaythatwouldbenefitthewhitecommunity,
segregationviolatedthefourteenthamendment,therefore,sodidMr.Lindner.
ThepositionofthedefenseisthatKarlLindnerdidnotviolatethefourteenth
amendment.HedidntdosobecausehewasworkinginthebestinterestoftheYoungerfamily
whenheofferedtobuythehouseoffofthem.ThedefensemightalsotrytoclaimthatLindner
didntactuallyapproachtheYoungerfamily.However,hedidviolatethefourteenthamendment
andhedidapproachtheYoungerfamily.WellIdontunderstandwhyyoupeoplearereacting
thisway.Whatdoyouthinkyouaregoingtogainbymovingintoaneighborhoodwhereyou
justarentwantedandwheresomeelementswillpeoplecangetawfulworkedupwhentheyfeel
thattheirwholewayoflifeandeverythingtheyveeverworkedforisthreatened(119).These
wordsweresaidfromMr.Lindnerhimself.ThepositionofthedefenseclaimsthatKarlLindner
onlywantedthebestfromtheYoungerfamilyandthathedidntapproachthem.Thisclearly
provesthat'swrong.KarlLindneronlywantedtheYoungerfamilytonotmoveintotheirnew
homeinClybourneParkbecausetherestofthecommunitydidntwantthemthere,becausethey
feltthreatenedandfeltliketheYoungerfamilywouldaffecttheirneighborhood.Youcanalso
clearlyseethatMr.LindnerdidapproachtheYoungerfamilyinawaythatprovesthathe,in
fact,wasviolatingthefourteenthamendment.
ThejuryshouldfindKarlLindnerandtheCPNAguiltybecausethefourteenth

amendmentwasviolatedwhenMr.LindnermadetheYoungerfamilytheproposalofbuyingthe
houseofoffthemjustbecauseitwouldbenefittheCOPAanditwouldtakebetteropportunities
fortheYoungerfamily.Thankyouforhearingmyclient'ssideofthestory,Mrs.LenaYounger.