In 1883, the Supreme Court struck down the Civil Rights Cases of 1875. As the nation grew weary of Reconstruction, the Supreme Court followed suit, ruling that while the Fourteenth Amendment protected an individual’s rights in places of public accommodation, it would not protect citizens from the discriminatory behavior of individuals. This video explores the case that led to the Court’s first great dissent, its first great dissenter, and the end of Reconstruction.
The end of the Civil War was marked by three important Constitutional Amendments intended to settle the legal status of former slaves and the balance of power between states and the federal government. The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery and involuntary servitude. The Fourteenth Amendment established African Americans as citizens and conveyed upon them rights and protections of citizenship – even if states did not protect those rights. The Fifteenth Amendment guaranteed every [adult, male] citizen the right to vote regardless of previous conditions of servitude or state laws that attempted to bar former slaves. These amendments were ratified between 1865 and 1870.
In addition to amending the Constitution, the president and Radical Republican leaders in Congress passed sweeping legislation to "reconstruct" the South and the Union. They passed laws creating free public schools for all and social welfare programs to address the social and economic conditions of the newly freed slaves, or "freedmen." In the legal sphere, it passed laws guaranteeing that Black people could serve on juries and testify in court. African Americans embraced and adopted the privileges of citizenship. They married, learned to read, purchased property, and ran for public office.
Not all of the Reconstruction efforts were benevolent, however. At the same time the national government issued new protections for freedmen, it also imposed harsh requirements and limits on the Old South. It divided the South into military districts controlled by Northerners. Many Southerners viewed this as an unfriendly "occupation." The federal government also prohibited former Confederate leaders from voting and from holding office. Many Southerners saw these efforts at punitive and harsh.
By the mid 1870's the backlash against Reconstruction became organized and severe. Organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Red Shirts, the White Hand, and other secret societies practiced terror tactics resulting in violence and death for many African Americans.
One law passed by the Radical Republicans was the Civil Rights Act of 1875. It gave full and equal access to places of public accommodations for all citizens. There were many legal challenges to this law. In 1883, the Supreme Court reviewed that law when it consolidated a group of cases referred to as the Civil Rights Cases.
In striking down the Civil Rights Act of 1875, the Court said that while the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits states from abridging the privileges and immunities of citizenship, it does not prohibit discrimination by individuals (or private businesses.) The court's decision to allow for discrimination between individuals lead to a legalized "separate and unequal" Jim Crow environment and signaled the end of the Reconstruction Era in the United States.
NARRATOR: In 1883, that law was challenged. The case, besides rewriting the nation's long-running racial drama, would produce the Supreme Court's first great dissent ... and its first great dissenter.
The Civil Rights Cases was a consolidation of five separate cases that spanned the country. Owners had been fined or indicted for denying black citizens seats at theaters in New York and San Francisco, rooms at hotels in Kansas and Missouri, a seat on a ladies' car of a Southern railroad. The owners wanted the law under which they'd been prosecuted struck down.
Much had changed in the eight years since the law's passage. Even in the North, people had grown weary of Reconstruction. Radical Republicans had lost control of Congress and the Southern statehouses. Federal troops had been pulled from the old Confederacy.
Members of the Court had no problem gauging the force and direction of the political winds. As Joseph Bradley's majority opinion circulated among the justices, eight of the nine signed on.
KLARMAN: The Supreme Court in 1883 strikes down the Civil Rights Act of 1875. And what the Court says is the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a state from denying equal protection. Individual behavior does not offend the Constitution. And the federal government doesn't get to come in and fix this problem.
WEINBERG: The Court took the view that the Fourteenth Amendment gave no protection from private discrimination. The landlord could exclude you from renting his house. The innkeeper could exclude you from the inn. The theater could exclude you from the theater. The Fourteenth Amendment said no state shall; it didn't say no landlady, no innkeeper, no theater manager.
POWE: The opinion ends with Justice Bradley saying, "There comes a time when, after the emergence of slavery, a person must take on the role of mere citizen and cease being a special favorite of the law." And what the Court is announcing then is, "Reconstruction is over. You're just like anyone else."
NARRATOR: There was only one justice who refused to join the majority. He was a starch-collared, fundamentalist Presbyterian and former slave holder from Kentucky named John Marshall Harlan. He was also the only justice who'd seen slavery and Reconstruction up close.
As attorney general of Kentucky just after the Civil War, Harlan had been a vocal opponent of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments. He'd been among the office holders who stirred white rage against freed slaves. In Harlan's hometown of Frankfort alone, there were 64 catalogued acts of white supremacist terror against freed blacks and their political allies. When Harlan saw the bitter fruit of his politics, he'd been shamed.
PRZYBYSZEWSKI: Even though he was raised as a white supremacist, raised as a slave holder, at the same time he firmly believed that his father had been an honorable white man, that he had never abused power. That may be a myth, but that's what he believed. And he wanted to live up to that kind of honor. And so people threw his history back in his face. And he said, "I would rather be right than consistent."
GILLMAN: The Northern members of the Court could talk in generalities about how the freedmen had become equal in the eyes of the law, and no longer needed the special help of the federal government. But Harlan knew better. He knew the predicament that blacks faced in the South. And he knew that civil rights could not be protected simply with the abstractions of the language of equality -- that civil rights required the federal government to give the aid that was necessary.
NARRATOR: Harlan determined to dissent in the Civil Rights Cases and to dissent loudly, but once he began to write, he found himself paralyzed ... until his wife pulled from storage a strange memento the Harlans had bought: the inkstand Chief Justice Roger Taney had used to write his infamous Dred Scott decision, a decision in which he had observed that blacks had no rights a white man was bound to respect.
PRZYBYSZEWSKI: She cleaned it. She filled it with ink and she put it on his desk so that when he came home from church one Sunday it was sitting there. And in effect, what she was reminding her husband was that the Dred Scott case needed to be undone.
AMAR: Harlan's dissent in the Civil Rights Cases says, we the Court protected the rights of slave masters and upheld congressional laws protecting slave masters. And now, when the Constitution has been amended to protect the rights of former slaves, we're striking down congressional laws designed to enforce that right. We are not treating the former slaves with the same kind of generosity that we once treated slave masters, and that's hypocrisy.
GILLMAN: Harlan is that one voice on the Court that still embodies that previous commitment that was made just a few years earlier to that goal, to the goal of racial equality. But the rest of the country, and the Court, had moved on.
KLARMAN: The country doesn't want to continue with this experiment in coerced reform of race relations in the South. And I think the Supreme Court is basically putting its stamp of approval on that. They're saying the national government is not going to intervene anymore in Southern race relations. We are restoring home rule on the race issue to the South. We're gonna return to the status quo, which is: upper-class whites in the South get to decide what race relations are gonna look like.
Academic standards correlations on Teachers' Domain use the Achievement Standards Network (ASN) database of state and national standards, provided to NSDL projects courtesy of JES & Co.
We assign reference terms to each statement within a standards document and to each media resource, and correlations are based upon matches of these terms for a given grade band. If a particular standards document of interest to you is not displayed yet, it most likely has not yet been processed by ASN or by Teachers' Domain. We will be adding social studies and arts correlations over the coming year, and also will be increasing the specificity of alignment.