Professor Lazarus has a piece on Brown v. Board in FindLaw. Conclusing thus:

Even more important, Brown's legacy is not properly discounted (as some seem to) because the decision did not achieve a magical transformation of law or society. This is far beyond the power of any single judicial decision, or even collection of decisions.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of the Supreme Court's work is hostage to the commitment of the President and Congress and, most important, to the receptiveness of the American people to legal principles announced. In the case of Brown, that commitment has too often been equivocal.

Rather, what makes the legacy of Brown so profound - what makes blacks of a certain generation speak of it with such awe and reverence - is its embodiment of an ideal of racial and social justice.

That ideal has eluded every society since the beginning of time. It is a Platonic form to be yearned for, that may never quite be achieved.

But prior to Brown, as a matter of national law, there was not even a yearning. Brown changed that, forever. It gave Americans a measuring stick for their aspiration to be a country truly just and free - and, better yet, it created a stick that could be seen, and held, and wielded, by a racial group ground down by 400 years of legal subjugation. (Moreover, in arguing the case before the Supreme Court for the NAACP, Thurgood Marshall became an indelible role model for all that for which he argued.)

This is an achievement well worth celebrating, and will be again in another 50 years, and 50 years beyond that, and for as long as we can remember the evil that bigotry is.

I've been reading up on Brown, and its reception and modern thoughts on the case. I have to admit to being a bit lost.
In the above bit from Lazarus, you see the expansive meaning that Brown has been bestowed...willing or unwilling. In many respects, I but the meaning. To wit, Brown itself was, perhaps, more important socially than legally--remembering that the decision had little effect, and it took a "Brown II" to actually enforce the thing.
But, as mentioned some posts down, I am having trouble getting at the legal kernel of Brown. The case overturns Plessy v. Feerguson's acceptance of segregation so long as schools are in fact equal. Thus, Brown demands integration in order to reach equality. This point still seems lost on us today, if I'm seeing Brown's ruling clearly...in that many commentators put quality education in front of integrated settings. Ask around, and see what is the priority. I'm hearing something along the lines of: 'before we send kids an hour away from home just to even up the numbers, we should be focused on getting quality schools.'

Perhaps Quality is more important than eqality. But if Equality is a value we shoot for, Brown holds that integration is essential.
As I've mentioned, this poses problems for what I would have generally supported; namely, historically black colleges. I reckon, where the schools are private, we have no problem...but what of the public schools?