2.6 Judge William F. Frank, Chief Justice, Missouri State Supreme Court

In February, 1937, the Court, in an opinion by Chief Justice William F. Frank, issued their verdict that supported the Missouri statute that allowed for out-of-state tuition for Missouri blacks to continue their education if the desired program was not offered at Lincoln University Once again, the legal team of Lloyd Gaines was not undaunted.

2.5 Missouri State Supreme Court Building, Jefferson City, Missouri

On December 12, 1936, Charles Hamilton Houston was in Jefferson City, Missouri arguing Gaines’ appeal in front of the Missouri Supreme Court. Houston added some teeth to his argument by adding that neither “the slender hope” that Gaines may someday attend a new law program at Lincoln nor the provision of tuition scholarships to attend an out-of-state law school met the US Constitution’s requirement of equal treatment regardless of race.

3.4 United States Supreme Court 1938

Gaines’ legal team, led by Houston, had faith in the justice system of the United States and anticipated getting a fair trial at the federal level. So far, all decisions had occurred in Missouri, a state with a segregated system.The fact that Gaines v Canada had reached the Supreme Court was promising indeed. It was rare that any case involving African-Americans would be considered by the highest court in the land. President Franklin D. Roosevelt had been appointing Justices that were more willing to consider cases concerned with civil rights. On November 9, 1938, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments in the Gaines v Canada case. The defense was unmoved by the rude treatment and made their presentation with professionalism and aplomb. Houston’s argument remained steadfast; not only was the state of Missouri’s statute concerning out-of-state tuition for blacks in violation of the 14th Amendment, but the very idea of segregation itself violated the Constitution. William Hogsett, the attorney for the University of Missouri, countered that the school was merely following state laws. The MU legal team was flustered as questions from the bench forced them to correct overstatements regarding Missouri’s “generosity to Negro students”. With crossed fingers and high hopes, the Gaines legal team rested their case and awaited the verdict. Meanwhile, Lloyd Gaines was still in Michigan. Lloyd held a W.P.A. job as a Civil Service Clerk and was in constant contact with his family and attorneys. His mood in his correspondence was hopeful and positive.

3.5 Supreme Court Justice James P. McReynolds

However, there was an obstacle on the court, namely James Clark McReynolds, an avowed racist. In fact, during the hearing, McReynolds turned his chair around and faced the wall when Houston presented his argument.

1.2 News Article About US Supreme Court Justices Rule in Favor of Lloyd Gaines by 6 to 2 Vote in The Call Newspaper

Following the decision, northern newspapers hailed it as “the Supreme Court speaking out in defense of the quality of human rights.” The Kansas City Call, one of the leading black newspapers in Missouri, declared, “If keeping the races separate is so important to Missourians that coeducation is unthinkable then let them count the cost!” The NAACP’s long-term plan for casting financial burden upon the Jim Crow states was now a reality.

3.5 The Missouri State Supreme Court Conferred a Honorary Law License for Lloyd Gaines.

On September 28th, 2006, the Missouri State Supreme Court conferred a posthumous law license for Mr. Gaines.