Comparison Of Persistence Framework Computer Science Essay

Comparison Of Persistence Framework Computer Science Essay Compare and contrast the following persistence frameworks: Java Persistence API (JPA), Hibernate and Java Database Connectivity. What improvements were made in EJB3.1 and JPA2? Include topics of scalability, security, connection pools, connection factories, entity management, transactional context, query languages, ORM, JCA, JNDI, the DAO-VO design pattern and specifically persistence layer(s) on a distributed n-tier enterprise platform in your discussion. Java Persistence API (JPA) JPA is an abstraction above JDBC that makes it possible to be independent of SQL. The main components of JPA are: ORM: Object relational mapping is a means to map objects to data stored in relational database [1]. JPA uses annotations and/or XML descriptor files to map POJO based java objects to relational database tables. CRUD: An entity manager manages lifecycle of JPA entities. It performs database related operations like create, retrieve, update and delete. JPQL: Java persistence query language allows writing CRUD queries using an object oriented query language. JTA: Java Transaction API provides transactions and locking mechanisms while accessing data concurrently. Callbacks and listeners: They hook business logic into the life cycle of a persistent object. Hibernate Hibernate is an Object relationship mapping framework. Hibernate helps in mapping POJO Java classes to SQL database tables. It has the power of significantly reducing development time. Hibernate uses annotations and/or XML (mapping) descriptor files to map the POJO Java objects in the application domain to relational database tables. Hibernate implements polymorphism and inheritance. Hibernate generated SQL maintains the portability of the application to all SQL databases. This HQL (SQL) allows create, retrieve, update and delete operations on POJO. This framework allows development of persistent Java classes which includes object oriented features like encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism, and collections frameworks. Hibernate Query Language (HQL): This is an extremely powerful query language similar to SQL. HQL is an object oriented SQL. Like SQL using tables and columns, HQL uses classes and properties. This means HQL uses object models for relational operations. Hence, it is less verbose as compared to SQL. JDBC JDBC is a standard java API for accessing relational database used for persisting state. It connects to database executes SQL statements and gets result. JDBC can also be used in a distributed environment. JDBC makes connection with an underlying data source using Connection Interface. It uses following mechanisms for connections: DriverManager This class is the management layer of JDBC. DriverManager loads any JDBC 4.0 drivers when an application makes connection to a data source as a part of its initialization. Other JDBC drivers must be explicitly loaded. DataSource DataSource can be a legacy database, file system or some other source of data. It is preferred over DriveManager as it allows the underlying data source to be apparent to the application. The two important extensions of the DataSource interface are as follows: ConnectionPoolDataSource The connection pool names are configured in JNDI. They support caching and reusing of physical connections in a way improving application performance and scalability. XADataSource XAdataSource uses XAConnection objects internally. It establishes physical connection with the database using the given user name and password. The connection thus obtained can be used in distributed transaction. Session bean and JDBC: Java architecture implementing session beans along with JDBC, any persistence request is delegated to the JDBC tier by the session bean. Upon request, the session bean calls JDBC layer to obtain a reference to object of type javax.sql.DataSource  interface. The DataSource type object serves acts as a resource manager factory for  java.sql.Connection  objects (as outlined by JDBC specification) that implement connections to a database. Once a  Connection  object is retrieved, the following business logic and persistence code (reads, updates, looping resultset, transaction commit/rollback etc.) are JDBC code. JDBC drawbacks Java applications initially used the JDBC API to create/read/update/delete/ data into relational databases. The JDBC API makes direct use of SQL statements to perform data persistence activities (create, read, update, and delete). When JDBC code is implemented in Java classes, the business logic gets tightly coupled to the Java class. The JDBC embeddable java code relies on SQL, which is not uniform across databases. Thus the code is tightly coupled to one type of database and hence difficult to migrate. Transactional Support: By default, JDBC drivers work in auto-commit mode, where each database SQL (read, update) is an atomic transaction. It is very easy to disable auto-commit, execute SQL in batch mode (multiple queries/updates) and then commit or rollback the transaction. DAO-VO A typical DAO (Data Access object) provides an interface that describes its contract with external interfaces. This outlines a series of methods for data persistence (CRUD operations). Generally a DAO is defined with a base interface and its methods are implemented by entity classes. A VO (Value object) is a simple POJO to transfer the data across various tiers of Java architecture. JDO For every method Persistence Manager is obtained, a transaction is fetched, and operations are executed. By availing attach/detach and fetch-groups, persisted objects are made available outside the DAO layer in a seamless way. Hibernate and JPA JPA acts as an adapter over Hibernate. JPA provides the entire API to interact with Hibernate. In a way JPA acts as an abstraction between the java code and Hibernate. In such a architecture it is easy to replace Hibernate if need be. JCA Java EE Connector Architecture (JCA) is a Java-based technology solution for connecting application servers and enterprise information systems (EIS) as part of enterprise application integration (EAI) solutions. While JDBC is specifically used to connect Java EE applications to databases, JCA is a more generic architecture for connection to legacy systems. What improvements were made in EJB3.1 and JPA2 Improvements in EJB 3.1 With EJB 3.1, there is no need to define home/local interfaces. Now EJB can be defined simple with an annotation. Singleton beans were introduced with EJB 3.1. Singleton beans can be used for shared data at application level. Asynchronous EJB calls are now supported with @Asynchronous method-level annotation. Packaging and deployment can be directly done in a war file. Session beans with a local view can be accessed without a separate local business interface. EJB Timer Service enhancements are also included to support scheduling jobs; Stateful Session Bean timed objects and deployment-time timer creation. Embedded container: A new embeddable API is available for executing EJB components within a Java SE environment (for unit testing, batch processing, etc.). EJB Lite: This definition of a lightweight subset of functionalities can be provided within Java EE Profiles (such as the Java EE Web Profile). Portable JNDI name: The syntax for looking up EJB components is now specified. Example: A Stateless EJB @Stateless public class CustomerEJB { @PersistenceContext(unitName = customerPU) private EntityManager em; public Customer findCustById(Long id) { return em.find(Customer.class, id); } public Customer createCust( Customer cust) { em.persist(cust); return cust; } } Improvements in JPA 2.0 Collections of basic types. Collections of embeddable. A persistent ordering is now maintained using the @OrderColumn annotation. Orphan removal that allows removal of child object when parent object is removed. Pessimistic locking has also been introduced along with optimistic locking. Foreign key mapping were introduced with JPA 2.0 for unidirectional one-to-many relationships. Improved support for maps (java HashMaps). Criteria query API which allows queries to be constructed in an object-oriented manner. Improvements in JPQL syntax. JPA 2.0 allows nesting of embeddable objects into other embeddable objects and has entity relationships. JPA 2.0 Example: @Entity @NamedQuery(name = findAllCust, query= select c from Customer c) public class Customer implements Serializable { @Id @GeneratedValue private Long id; @Column(name = cust_name) private String custName; public Customer() { } //à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.Get and set methods @Override public String toString(){ StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(100); sb.append(id : );sb.append(id);sb.append( ; ); sb.append(custName : );sb.append(custName);sb.append( ; ); return sb.toString(); }

Teenage Dating in the 1950s Essay -- Relationships

Teenage Dating in the 1950s Teenagers in the 1950's are so iconic that, for some, they represent the last generation of innocence before it is "lost" in the sixties. When asked to imagine this lost group, images of bobbysoxers, letterman jackets, malt shops and sock hops come instantly to mind. Images like these are so classic, they, for a number of people, are "as American as apple pie." They are produced and perpetuated by the media, through films like Grease and Pleasantville and television shows like Happy Days, The Donna Reed Show, and Leave It to Beaver. Because of these entertainment forums, these images will continue to be a pop cultural symbol of the 1950's. After the second World War, teenagers became much more noticeable in America (Bailey 47). Their presence and existence became readily more apparent because they were granted more freedom than previous generations ever were. Teenagers like these were unique. They were given a chance to redefine the ways things were done in America. One of the conventions they put a new spin on, and consequently revolutionize, is the idea and practice of dating. The 1950's set up precedents in dating that led to what many consider "normal" dating today. ORIGINS OF DATING Dating is definitely an "American phenomenon." Few other countries carry on this practice with as much fervor as Americans do. Then again, few other countries have the same social conditions as America. Since the turn of the century, there has been a greater freedom between men and women, for example, both attend the same schools with the same classes. Both sexes become accustomed to the other at early ages which is very conducive to the practice of dating (Merrill 61). Dating essentially replaced the pra... ...isible. They drove cars and had money to spend. They were a new source of power, independent from their parents and ready for a change. Works Cited Bailey, Beth. From Front Porch to Back Seat. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1988. "Cross Country Report on Teens." Seventeen Sept. 1959: 134-135. "Do I have the right to love?" Seventeen May 1959: 136. Gould, Sandra. Always Say Maybe. New York: Golden Press, 1960. "How Much Do Boys Spend on Girls?" Seventeen June 1959: 75, 121. McGinnis, Tom. A Girl's Guide to Dating and Going Steady. New York: Doubleday, 1968. Merrill, Frances E. Courtship and Marriage. New York: William Sloane, 1949. Sadler, William. Courtship and Love. New York: Macmillan, 1952. Smith, Ken. Mental Hygiene: Classroom Films 1945-1970. New York: Blast Books, 1999. "The Art of Pursuit." Seventeen Feb. 1959: 72-73, 131.

Organisation Communication-Ethics Essay

Dilemma 1 As the newly appointed personnel director my option would be to follow the company’s procedure of screening the applicants and forwarding the top three to the management for interviews. However before forwarding the top three to the management, I would first confront the president on his discriminatory attitude. This would be necessary since if the applicants just go for interviews with the management, the president’s attitude may lead to all three of them not being selected. Then it will look like the selection process was unsatisfactory. In addition, it is important for the president to be aware of the fact that the three potential employees are all female so that he is not caught unaware. The information that all three applicants are female would be conveyed to him in the confrontational meeting. Confronting him will give an opportunity for bringing out the unethical nature of the president’s attitude. During the confrontation meeting I will attempt to explain to the president that the applicants ought to be selected using the principles of merit, fairness and equality. I will also point out that the management could end up selecting a female applicant even though there was a male applicant since the chances of having three male applicants would be small. In addition confrontation would also help to avoid possible liability for using sex as a determinant in the selection process. This is a contravention of the Civil Rights Act and it is better to prevent it rather than have the company lose large amounts of cash in a court case should the company be sued by any of the three female applicants (Shockley-Zalabak, 2005). Another advantage that confronting the president has is that the president will be aware that decisions will not be made according to his whims and desires especially when they are unethical. This would contribute hopefully to some amount of professional respect where the president sees that I have the interests of the organization and the employees as well at heart. It would also mean that the president would not expect to push me around as far as personnel issues were concerned and rather would leave me to discharge my duties independently while asking for help where necessary. The meeting with the president would remain private and the issue would only be discussed with other members of management if the president refused to change his stance on the issue. Then it would mean that such discriminatory practice would be perpetuated and failure to include other members of management would result in unequal employment opportunities for the employees. In such a situation the appropriate thing to do is to confront the president about his discriminatory posture. This can help to bring about a stop to such discriminatory behavior and also to avoid the legal implications of such discriminatory attitudes when employing. The company could suffer great losses by paying out damages and these could have been avoided. In addition, a company’s policy should be such that they avoid practices that are discriminatory in nature and the company should work towards ensuring that all people regardless of gender are treated equally. This involves availing opportunities equally to all employees regardless of gender, ethnicity, religion or race (Caux Round Table, 2006). Confrontation with the president however requires tact and it is best to start with how the company is likely to suffer from discriminatory practices, beginning with the legal implications and their effect on the profitability of the company. Then other factors such as the negative publicity the company would receive from such a court case where discrimination along gender lines has been exposed as a factor in employment and also citing the goodwill of the employees as an issue that would be affected. This is because most employees may side with their colleagues who have been discriminated against or feel like they are the next in line to suffer from a discriminatory practice. Due to the sensitive nature of the meeting it would best be had in privacy with the president. After the president has changed his mind then the selection process can continue as outlined by company policy. Dilemma 2 In the situation above as the personnel liaison I would press the crew member for more information on who was involved or places where the drug use occurred.  I would impress on her the need to give more specific information so that I can act as soon as possible and so as to give me a head start in performing my own investigation. This would be done by explaining to her the danger that the involved crew members and personnel liaison people were putting on her and other members of the crew. This is because by being involved in drug use they compromised their mental alertness when operating machinery which could result in injury to others and also in losses for the company. While attempting to get as much information as possible from the crew member I would also be conducting my own investigations. This would be done discreetly and would involve trips to the production line to unearth evidence of drug use. It would also involve interviews with every crew member to try and find out those who are involved in the drug use. Other personnel liaisons would not be involved in the investigations to prevent those who are involved from pre-empting the investigation process. During the interviews the employees would be made aware of the consequences of drug use with police involvement being the major factor especially if the drugs are found to be illegal drugs. This would most likely cause some of the crew members to crack under the pressure and giving up the necessary information to deal with the drug problems at the plant. If this fails to generate adequate information the crew members and all personnel liaison would be informed of the need for testing due to safety issues and firing or suspension of those found to be using drugs at the plant. In a situation of drug use at manufacturing plant, the person in charge in this case the liaison officer has a role of conducting investigations to find out what truth there is in the crew members allegations and expose all those involved in drug use (Shockley-Zalaback, 2007). Drug use is a criminal offence depending on the drug being used and it has the effect of compromising the quality of work of the users and thus lowering the efficiency of the company. Aside from the negative effect on the profitability of the company, it is also unethical practice to ignore the report of the crew member as it would be akin to condoning drug use in the company. In dealing with the issue it is best to first ensure that there is a handbook that all the employees are aware of and have access to regarding use of drugs at the workplace (People Management, 2007). This means that the employees cannot claim ignorance of company policy regarding drug use at the work place. Holding meetings to draw attention to the problem of drug use is also another means of communicating and citing the disciplinary issues that are associated with drug use. In addition having an intranet that has information on drug use and use of posters, newsletters to communicate company policy in drug misuse at work. In managing the situation it is also necessary that emphasis be on support that the company will offer those with drug dependence problems rather than on disciplinary issues. While this cannot be ignored, it discourages most people from admitting that they have a problem. Also it means that the company may not be meeting its legal obligations in managing those people who have drug use problems. What I would have done is slightly different from what should be done. My approach is more focussed on disciplinary measures rather than supportive measures. As a result it may not be very effective at flushing out all the drug users and some may persist with their problem until it causes danger or injury to others. The approach I took was more disciplinary because it was aimed at reaching those who merely use drugs at the plant irresponsibly. It did not give consideration to those who may have serious problems of managing their drug use, but if identified these would be referred to a rehabilitation center and would retain their jobs as long as they complied with treatment.

Thurgood Marshall, First Black Supreme Court Justice

Thurgood Marshall (July 2, 1908–January 24, 1993), the great-grandson of slaves, was the first African-American justice appointed to the United States Supreme Court, where he served from 1967 to 1991. Earlier in his career, Marshall was a pioneering civil rights attorney who successfully argued the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education, a major step in the fight to desegregate American schools. The 1954 Brown decision is considered one of the most significant civil rights victories of the 20th century. Fast Facts: Thurgood Marshall Known For: First African-American Supreme Court justice, landmark civil rights lawyerAlso Known As: Thoroughgood Marshall, Great DissenterBorn: July 2, 1908 in Baltimore, MarylandParents: William Canfield Marshall, Norma AricaDied: January 24, 1993 in Bethesda, MarylandEducation: Lincoln University, Pennsylvania  (BA), Howard University  (LLB)Published Works: Thurgood Marshall: His Speeches, Writings, Arguments, Opinions, and Reminiscences (The Library of Black America series) (2001)Awards and Honors: The Thurgood Marshall Award, established in 1992 by the American Bar Association, is presented annually to a recipient to recognize long-term contributions by members of the legal profession to the advancement of civil rights, civil liberties, and human rights in the United States, the ABA says. Marshall received the inaugural award in 1992.Spouse(s): Cecilia Suyat Marshall  (m. 1955–1993),  Vivian Burey Marshall (m. 1929–1955)Children: John W. Marshall,  Thurgoo d Marshall, Jr.Notable Quote: It is interesting to me that the very people...that would object to sending their white children to school with Negroes are eating food that has been prepared, served, and almost put in their mouths by the mothers of those children. Childhood Marshall (named Thoroughgood at birth) was born in Baltimore on Jan. 24, 1908, the second son of Norma and William Marshall. Norma was an elementary school teacher and William worked as a railroad porter. When Thurgood was 2 years old, the family moved to Harlem in New York City, where Norma earned an advanced teaching degree at Columbia University. The Marshalls returned to Baltimore in 1913 when Thurgood was 5. Thurgood and his brother Aubrey attended an elementary school for blacks only and their mother taught in one as well. William Marshall, who had never graduated from high school, worked as a waiter in a whites-only country club. By second grade, Marshall, weary of being teased about his unusual name and equally weary of writing it out, shortened it to â€Å"Thurgood.† In high school, Marshall earned decent grades but had a tendency to stir up trouble in the classroom. As punishment for some of his misdeeds, he was ordered to memorize portions of the U.S. Constitution. By the time he left high school, Marshall knew the entire document. Marshall always knew that he wanted to go to college but realized his parents couldnt afford to pay his tuition. Thus, he began saving money while he was in high school, working as a delivery boy and a waiter. In September 1925, Marshall entered Lincoln University, an African-American college in Philadelphia. He intended to study dentistry. College Years Marshall embraced college life. He became the star of the debate club and joined a fraternity; he was also very popular with young women. Yet Marshall found himself ever aware of the need to earn money. He worked two jobs and supplemented that income with his earnings from winning card games on campus. Armed with the defiant attitude that had gotten him into trouble in high school, Marshall was suspended twice for fraternity pranks. But Marshall was also capable of more serious endeavors, as when he helped to integrate a local movie theater. When Marshall and his friends attended a movie in downtown Philadelphia, they were ordered to sit in the balcony (the only place that blacks were allowed). The young men refused and sat in the main seating area. Despite being insulted by white patrons, they remained in their seats and watched the movie. From then on, they sat wherever they liked at the theater. By his second year at Lincoln, Marshall had decided he didnt want to become a dentist, planning instead to use his oratory gifts as a practicing attorney. (Marshall, who was 6-foot-2, later joked that his hands were probably too big for him to have become a dentist.) Marriage and Law School In his junior year, Marshall met Vivian Buster Burey, a student at the University of Pennsylvania. They fell in love and, despite Marshalls mothers objections—she felt they were too young and too poor—married in 1929 at the beginning of Marshalls senior year. After graduating from Lincoln in 1930, Marshall enrolled at Howard University Law School, a historically black college in Washington, D.C., where his brother Aubrey was attending medical school. Marshalls first choice had been the University of Maryland Law School, but he was refused admission because of his race. Norma Marshall pawned her wedding and engagement rings to help her younger son pay his tuition. Marshall and his wife lived with his parents in Baltimore to save money. Marshall commuted by train to Washington every day and worked three part-time jobs to make ends meet. Marshalls hard work paid off. He rose to the top of the class in his first year and won the plum job of an assistant in the law school library. There, he worked closely with the man who became his mentor, law school dean Charles Hamilton Houston. Houston, who resented the discrimination he had suffered as a soldier during World War I, had made it his mission to educate a new generation of African-American lawyers. He envisioned a group of attorneys who would use their law degrees to fight racial discrimination. Houston was convinced that the basis for that fight would be the U.S. Constitution itself. He made a profound impression upon Marshall. While working in the Howard law library, Marshall came into contact with several lawyers and activists from the NAACP. He joined the organization and became an active member. Marshall graduated first in his class in 1933 and passed the bar exam later that year. Working for the NAACP Marshall opened his own law practice in Baltimore in 1933 at the age of 25. He had few clients at first, and most of those cases involved minor charges, such as traffic tickets and petty thefts. It did not help that Marshall opened his practice in the midst of the Great Depression. Marshall became increasingly active in the local NAACP, recruiting new members for its Baltimore branch. Because he was well-educated, light-skinned, and dressed well, however, he sometimes found it difficult to find common ground with some African-Americans. Some felt Marshall had an appearance closer to that of a white man than to one of their own race. But Marshalls down-to-earth personality and easy communication style helped to win over many new members. Soon, Marshall began taking cases for the NAACP and was hired as part-time legal counsel in 1935. As his reputation grew, Marshall became known not only for his skill as a lawyer but also for his bawdy sense of humor and love of storytelling. In the late 1930s, Marshall represented African-American teachers in Maryland who were receiving only half the pay that white teachers earned. Marshall won equal-pay agreements in nine Maryland school boards and in 1939, convincing a federal court to declare unequal salaries for public school teachers unconstitutional. Marshall also had the satisfaction of working on a case, ​Murray v. Pearson, in which he helped a black man gain admission to the University of Maryland Law School in 1935. That same school had rejected Marshall only five years earlier. NAACP Chief Counsel In 1938, Marshall was named chief counsel to the NAACP in New York. Thrilled about having a steady income, he and Buster moved to Harlem, where Marshall had first gone with his parents as a young child. Marshall, whose new job required extensive travel and an immense workload, typically worked on discrimination cases in areas such as housing, labor, and travel accommodations. Marshall, in 1940, won the first of his Supreme Court victories in Chambers v. Florida, in which the Court overturned the convictions of four black men who had been beaten and coerced into confessing to a murder. For another case, Marshall was sent to Dallas to represent a black man who had been summoned for jury duty and who had been dismissed when court officers realized he was not white. Marshall met with Texas governor James Allred, whom he successfully persuaded that African-Americans had a right to serve on a jury. The governor went a step further, promising to provide Texas Rangers to protect those blacks who served on juries. Yet not every situation was so easily managed. Marshall had to take special precautions whenever he traveled, especially when working on controversial cases. He was protected by NAACP bodyguards and had to find safe housing—usually in private homes—wherever he went. Despite these security measures, Marshall often feared for his safety because of numerous threats. He was forced to use evasive tactics, such as wearing disguises and switching to different cars during trips. On one occasion, Marshall was taken into custody by a group of policemen while in a small Tennessee town working on a case. He was forced from his car and driven to an isolated area near a river, where an angry mob of white men awaited. Marshalls companion, another black attorney, followed the police car and refused to leave until Marshall was released. The police, perhaps because the witness was a prominent Nashville attorney, drove Marshall back to town. Separate but Not Equal Marshall continued to make significant gains in the battle for racial equality in the areas of both voting rights and education. He argued a case before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1944 (Smith v. Allwright), claiming that Texas Democratic Party rules unfairly denied blacks the right to vote in primaries. The Court agreed, ruling that all citizens, regardless of race, had the constitutional right to vote in primaries. In 1945, the NAACP made a momentous change in its strategy. Instead of working to enforce the separate but equal provision of the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision, the NAACP strove to achieve equality in a different way. Since the notion of separate but equal facilities had never truly been accomplished in the past (public services for blacks were uniformly inferior to those for whites), the only solution would be to make all public facilities and services open to all races. Two important cases tried by Marshall between 1948 and 1950 contributed greatly to the eventual overturning of Plessy v. Ferguson. In each case (Sweatt v. Painter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma State Regents), the universities involved (the University of Texas and University of Oklahoma) failed to provide for black students an education equal to that provided for white students. Marshall successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court that the universities did not provide equal facilities for either student. The Court ordered both schools to admit black students into their mainstream programs. Overall, between 1940 and 1961, Marshall won 29 of the 32 cases he argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. Brown v. Board of Education In 1951, a court decision in Topeka, Kansas became the stimulus for Thurgood Marshalls most significant case. Oliver Brown of Topeka had sued that citys Board of Education, claiming that his daughter was forced to travel a long distance from her home just to attend a segregated school. Brown wanted his daughter to attend the school nearest their home—a school designated for whites only. The U.S. District Court of Kansas disagreed, asserting that the African-American school offered an education equal in quality to the white schools of Topeka. Marshall headed the appeal of the Brown case, which he combined with four other similar cases and filed as Brown v. Board of Education. The case came before the U.S. Supreme Court in December 1952. Marshall made it clear in his opening statements to the Supreme Court that what he sought was not merely a resolution for the five individual cases; his goal was to end racial segregation in schools. He argued that segregation caused blacks to feel innately inferior. The opposing lawyer argued that integration would harm white children. The debate went on for three days. The Court adjourned on Dec. 11, 1952, and did not convene on Brown again until June 1953. But the justices did not render a decision; instead, they requested that the attorneys supply more information. Their main question: Did the attorneys believe that the 14th Amendment, which addresses citizenship rights, prohibited segregation in schools? Marshall and his team went to work to prove that it did. After hearing the case again in December 1953, the Court did not come to a decision until May 17, 1954. Chief Justice Earl Warren announced that the Court had come to the unanimous decision that segregation in the public schools violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Marshall was ecstatic; he always believed he would win, but was surprised that there were no dissenting votes. The Brown decision did not result in overnight desegregation of southern schools. While some school boards did begin making plans for desegregating schools, few southern school districts were in a hurry to adopt the new standards. Loss and Remarriage In November 1954, Marshall received devastating news about Buster. His 44-year-old wife had been ill for months but had been misdiagnosed as having the flu or pleurisy. In fact, she had incurable cancer. However, when she found out, she inexplicably kept her diagnosis a secret from her husband. When Marshall learned how ill Buster was, he set all work aside and took care of his wife for nine weeks before she died in February 1955. The couple had been married for 25 years. Because Buster had suffered several miscarriages, they had never had the family they so desired. Marshall mourned but did not remain single for long. In December 1955, Marshall married Cecilia Cissy Suyat, a secretary at the NAACP. He was 47, and his new wife was 19 years his junior. They went on to have two sons, Thurgood, Jr. and John. Work for the Federal Government In September 1961, Marshall was rewarded for his years of legal work when President John F. Kennedy appointed him a judge on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Although he hated to leave the NAACP, Marshall accepted the nomination. It took nearly a year for him to be approved by the Senate, many of whose members still resented his involvement in school desegregation. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson named Marshall to the post of solicitor general of the United States. In this role, Marshall was responsible for representing the government when it was being sued by a corporation or an individual. In his two years as solicitor general, Marshall won 14 of the 19 cases he argued. Supreme Court Justice On June 13, 1967, President Johnson announced Thurgood Marshall as the nominee for Supreme Court Justice to fill the vacancy created by Justice Tom C. Clarks departure. Some southern senators—notably Strom Thurmond—fought Marshalls confirmation, but Marshall was confirmed and then sworn in on Oct. 2, 1967. At the age of 59, Marshall became the first African-American to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. Marshall took a liberal stance in most of the Courts rulings. He consistently voted against any form of censorship and was strongly opposed to the death penalty. In the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, Marshall voted with the majority to uphold a womans right to choose to have an abortion. Marshall was also in favor of affirmative action. As more conservative justices were appointed to the Court during the Republican administrations of presidents Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, and Gerald Ford, Marshall found himself increasingly in the minority, often as the lone voice of dissent. He became known as The Great Dissenter. In 1980, the University of Maryland honored Marshall by naming its new law library after him. Still bitter about how the university had rejected him 50 years earlier, Marshall refused to attend the dedication. Retirement and Death Marshall resisted the idea of retirement, but by the early 1990s, his health was failing and he had problems with both his hearing and vision. On June 27, 1991, Marshall submitted his letter of resignation to President George H. W. Bush. Marshall was replaced by Justice Clarence Thomas. Marshall died of heart failure on Jan. 24, 1993, at age 84; he was buried at Arlington National Cemetery. Marshall was posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton in November 1993. Sources Cassie, Ron. â€Å"The Legacy of Thurgood Marshall.†Ã‚  Baltimore Magazine, 25 Jan. 2019.Crowther, Linnea. â€Å"Thurgood Marshall: 20 Facts.†Ã‚  Legacy.com, 31 Jan. 2017.â€Å"Past Recipients Keynote Speakers.†Ã‚  American Bar Association.â€Å"Thurgood Marshalls Unique Supreme Court Legacy.†Ã‚  National Constitution Center – Constitutioncenter.org.