SHELLEY v. KRAEMER

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
72
Petitioner 
Shelley
Respondent 
Kraemer
Consolidation 
McGhee v. Sipes, No. 87
Opinion 
Term:
Facts of the Case 

The Kraemers were a white couple who owned a residence in a Missouri neighborhood governed by a restrictive covenant. This was a private agreement that prevented blacks from owning property in the Kraemers' subdivision. The Shelleys were a black couple who moved into the Kraemers neighborhood. The Kraemers went to court to enforce the restrictive covenant against the Shelleys.

Question 

Does the enforcement of a racially restrictive covenant violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment?

Conclusion 
Decision: 6 votes for Shelley, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: US Const Amend 14

State courts could not constitutionally prevent the sale of real property to blacks even if that property is covered by a racially restrictive covenant. Standing alone, racially restrictive covenants violate no rights. However, their enforcement by state court injunctions constitute state action in violation of the 14th Amendment.

Cite this Page
SHELLEY v. KRAEMER. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 02 July 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1947/1947_72/>.
SHELLEY v. KRAEMER, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1947/1947_72/ (last visited July 2, 2014).
"SHELLEY v. KRAEMER," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed July 2, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1949/1947/1947_72/.