Civil Rights Case Study #2 - the Civil Rights Cases

Compelling Policy Question: What should be the goal of Government policies related to Civil Rights?

Historical Context:

In February of 1875 Congress passed the Civil Rights bill,

Then on March 1, 1875 President Ulysses S. Grant signed the bill into law.

The Civil Rights Act of 1875 made discrimination illegal for transportation companies, hotels, and theaters. Under the law if someone was discriminated against by one of these businesses, the business would have to pay them for damages, as well as pay a fine to the government.

A number of court cases were caused by the Civil Rights Act of 1875, which makes sense, if you were a person who was told you could sue a company that discriminated against you, would you sue them?

A number of those businesses argued they should not have to pay the fine because they felt the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was Unconstitutional.

These cases were: United States v. Stanley (discrimination by hotel), United States v. Ryan (discrimination by theater), United States v. Nichols (discrimination by hotel), United States v. Singleton (discrimination by theater) , and Robinson v. Memphis & Charleston Railroad

These cases were grouped together and tried by the Supreme Court of the United States in the “Civil Rights Cases” in 1883.

Section One - Guiding Question, Why do people believe the United State Government does not have a role in enforcing Civil Rights?

In 1883, Chief Justice Joseph P. Bradley, wrote,

Source: Majority Opinion, 109 U.S. 3 Civil Rights Cases (modified/link to original) (Justice Bradley's bio)

Invasion of individual rights is not the goal of the 14th Amendment. It makes illegal all STATE laws and actions, which hurt the rights of citizens of the United States, or which injures them in life, liberty or property without due process of law, or denies them equal protection of the laws.

It does not give Congress the power to make laws that should be made by the states. It does not authorize congress to create laws for cities controlling private rights.

It would be running the slavery argument into the ground to make it apply to every act of discrimination a person makes when he decides which guests he will entertain, who he will take into his car; or admit to his concert or theater, or do business with. Innkeepers and railroads, by the laws of all the states, are already required to give good accommodation to all unobjectionable persons who pay for them.

When a man has emerged from slavery, his rights as a citizen, or a man, are to be protected just the same as other men's rights are protected. There were thousands of free colored people in this country before the abolition of slavery, enjoying all the rights of life, liberty, and property the same as white citizens; yet no one, at that time, thought that it was any invasion of their rights as freemen because they were not admitted to all the privileges enjoyed by white citizens.

Discrimination based on color were not seen as part of slavery.

Section Two - Guiding Question, Why do people believe the United State Government does have a role in enforcing Civil Rights?

In 1883, Justice John Marshall Harlan, wrote,

Source: Dissenting Opinion, 109 U.S. 3 Civil Rights Cases (modified/link to original)

Harlan's biography

The purpose of the act of congress of 1875, was to prevent race discrimination. It does not define how inns, public conveyances, and places of public amusement must be run, but only outlaws discrimination, based on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Some argue congress did not have the power, even under the 13th or 14th amendments, to create the Civil Rights Act of 1875

I argue that since slavery was the main reason the 13th amendment was created, and since that institution rested wholly upon the inferiority, as a race, of those held in bondage. Congress, therefore, under its power to enforce that amendment, may create laws to protect that people against discrimination, because of their race, of any civil rights enjoyed by other freemen in the same state.

The right of a colored person to use a public highway, like freemen of other races, is as fundamental a right as any other civil freedom.

This discrimination is based on the same foundation as slavery. The only way it will last is if, in this land of liberty, a class is allowed to be discriminated against. The purpose of congressional legislation has been to enable the black race to take only the rank of a citizen. .No state, or corporation, can discriminate against freemen or citizens, in their civil rights, because of their race. The rights Congress, by the act of 1875, worked to protect are legal, not social, rights.