Principle and Prejudice: The Supreme Court and Race in the Progressive Era. Part 1: The Heyday of Jim Crow

1982 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benno C. Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Progressive Era ◽  
Jim Crow ◽  
The Supreme Court

Let Them Plow

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Jim Crow ◽  
School Desegregation ◽  
Turn Of The Century ◽  
People Of Color ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Regional Variations ◽  
The Supreme Court

Chapter Two examines a handful of pivotal Supreme Court cases brought against school desegregation at the turn of the century and the first few decades of the 20th century. The Cumming v. Georgia case in 1899 indicated a demand for equality on the basis of taxpayer status that was understood by the plaintiffs to be intertwined with race, a demand that was interpreted by the Supreme Court only in the language of taxation and federalism. This chapter also highlights regional variations and a number of cases brought at the height of Jim Crow segregation by people of color who fell outside the black-white paradigm, even if courts then imposed it on them.

The Age of Segregation, 1900–1950

2020 ◽  
pp. 117-152
Author(s):  
Donald G. Nieman
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Communist Party ◽  
Jim Crow ◽  
World War ◽  
Civil Rights Organizations ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The New Deal

This chapter argues that segregation generated organized opposition from African Americans and a small group of whites that challenged the system. Segregation was rigid, capricious, and designed to demonstrate white power. While it kept most blacks in menial positions, a small black middle class emerged that produced leaders who attacked Jim Crow. The organization leading the charge was the NAACP, which developed publicity, lobbying, and litigation campaigns. The effort gained steam in the 1930s, as a cadre of black lawyers challenged segregated education, the CIO and the Communist party championed civil rights, and the New Deal gave blacks a voice in federal policy. It further accelerated during World War II as the federal government challenged workplace discrimination, membership in civil rights organizations swelled, black veterans demanded their rights, and the Supreme Court became more aggressive on civil rights.

“Ravished by Some Moron”: The Eugenic Origins of the Minnesota Psychopathic Personality Act of 1939

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly Ladd-Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Sex Offenders ◽  
Social Control ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Progressive Era ◽  
Civil Commitment ◽  
Psychopathic Personality ◽  
Sex Crimes ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Indefinite Detention ◽  
Administrative Framework

Abstract:Twenty U.S. states permit the indefinite detention of civilly committed sex offenders after the end of their prison sentences if their dangerousness is due to a “mental abnormality.” This article explores the origins of one such law by examining its predecessor, the Minnesota Psychopathic Personality Act of 1939. Passed in the wake of a panic over sex crimes and upheld by the Supreme Court in 1940, Minnesota’s psychopath statute extended a 1917 eugenics law providing for the compulsory civil commitment and institutionalization of “defectives” to persons alleged to have a psychopathic personality. Analyzing the 1917 and 1939 laws together shows how one state’s psychopath statute had less to do with psychiatric authority than with the legal and administrative framework established by Progressive-era eugenics. From the 1910s until today, dubious claims about the ability of science to identify potential criminals legitimized politically popular, but constitutionally questionable, forms of administrative and social control.

The Mandate of the Ninth Amendment: Why Footnote Four Is Wrong

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randy E. Barnett
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Progressive Era ◽  
New Deal ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Ninth Amendment ◽  
The New Deal

This chapter examines the revival of the presumption of constitutionality and its almost immediate qualification in the form of Footnote Four, which it argues is inconsistent with the Ninth Amendment. The era in which the Supreme Court attempted to scrutinize the necessity and propriety of state and federal restrictions on liberty came to a close as the perceived legitimacy of legislative activism continued to grow. The doctrinal vehicle used by the New Deal Court to overturn the Progressive Era precedents was the adoption of a presumption of constitutionality. The chapter first provides an overview of Footnote Four before discussing the Ninth Amendment, which mandates that unenumerated rights be treated the same as those that are listed. It shows that Footnote Four runs afoul of the text of the Constitution, and more specifically the Ninth Amendment.

Epilogue

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary L. Dudziak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Jim Crow ◽  
Racial Justice ◽  
Supreme Court Justice ◽  
Political Coalition ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Commission Report ◽  
Separate And Unequal ◽  
The 1960S

This chapter details events following Marshall's appointment to the Supreme Court. As a Supreme Court justice, Marshall worked on the problem of race in America. His life's focus became undoing the constitutional embodiment of Jim Crow, surely one of the impediments to equality. However, moving the nation toward a fuller vision of racial justice in the 1960s required other tools than those Marshall possessed, and this required a deeper commitment from a broader political coalition. What had once seemed possible was out of reach by 1968. A nation torn apart over war and divided over domestic politics was not to be united around the vision of its 1960s leaders. It was a cruel irony that in shining a light on the cities, the Kerner Commission Report seemed a reverse echo of Brown: “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document