The American Supreme Court considered the case Shelly v. Kraemer, the essence of which was that the Shelly family acquired real estate in St. Louis, Missouri. The Shelly family was African American and did not know that a restrictive agreement was in effect for the purchase of the real estate in the area. This agreement was based on the fact that people of the Negro and Mongolian races did not have the right to acquire any property in a particular area. In this regard, Louis Kremer sued Shelley to prevent them from getting the property into ownership. The court’s decision was that the agreement should take place and should enter into force.
The court’s decision is striking that despite the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that people should not be deprived of any rights because of skin color, race, etc., it was decided that the agreement should be applied. According to the court’s decision, the agreement prohibiting Shelley from acquiring real estate in St. Louis does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. In this case, the case is based on a concluded private contract, which is not subject to any amendments. Nevertheless, the obstacle to acquiring real estate for people of a different race from the majority is unfair and racist. All people should have the right to purchase property, which is entirely consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment and excludes any elements of any additional agreements.
After reading the court’s decision, one of the most pressing questions is how black people can achieve equal treatment for themselves, even if states do not stand up for them. The problem is that despite all the laws and amendments, African Americans continue to experience racial harassment from the racial majority as well as the State on whose behalf the courts act. There are various ways to circumvent, for example, amendments to the constitution, which eliminate the chances of eradicating racism. In this case and a number of other similar cases, the court’s decision was based not on official documents but on private agreements. Such situations contribute to the growth of racism and violate people’s rights to equal treatment and opportunities.
The court ruled that the owners of the district must enforce the agreement against the Shelley family. The agreement was not signed by all residents of the neighborhood, yet the majority signed it. Although the Shelley family should have been protected by the Fourteenth Amendment on equal protection, the agreement prevails over this amendment. The Shelleys were not aware of this agreement, and yet they are not allowed to live in this area of the state by order of the Supreme Court of Missouri.
In conclusion, in the case Shelly v. Kraemer, which was considered in the Supreme Court of the United States, the result was the recognition of the validity of the frequent agreement that African Americans do not have the right to acquire real estate. Although the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution excludes discrimination based on race and skin color, yet in this case, the agreement became the primary document in the case. Because even the State supports private agreements and not a State official document, the eradication of racism cannot take place. Injustice towards black people continues to grow and concerns such essential and integral parts of life as the right to purchase housing.