Race Distinctions in American LawStephenson, Gilbert Thomas
History
Race Distinctions in American Law
Stephenson, Gilbert Thomas
African Americans -- Politics and government; Law -- United States -- History; United States -- Race relations
The first “Suffrage Amendment” of the Southern States, that of
Mississippi, was adopted twenty years ago, and yet no case involving the
constitutionality of these laws has been squarely presented to the
Supreme Court of the United States. The one most nearly in point was
Williams v. Mississippi[724] in 1898. Williams, a Negro, had been
indicted by a jury composed wholly of white men. The law required that a
juror should be an elector. Williams contended that the provisions of
the Constitution about suffrage were a scheme to discriminate against
Negroes, that the discrimination was effected, not by the wording of the
law, but by the powers vested in the administrative officers. The United
States Supreme Court refused to interfere, saying that the laws did not,
on their face, discriminate against the races, and that it “had not been
shown that their actual administration was evil, only that evil was
possible under them.”
Several suits[725] have been brought, the purpose of which has been to
test the constitutionality of these laws, but they have all been decided
on points of procedure or on technical grounds.
At present, the suffrage laws of the Southern States stand judicially
unimpugned in the light of the Fifteenth Amendment. Mr. John Mabry
Mathews[726] says that the Supreme Court has shown an “apparent desire
to shift the duty of redressing such wrongs [those arising under the
suffrage laws] upon the political department of the Government. So far
as Congress has given any indication of its attitude upon the subject,
it has intimated that the matter is one for judicial settlement. But the
absence of congressional legislation would in any case hamper the
efficiency of the courts in securing the practical enforcement of the
Amendment. The real reason behind the attitude of both Congress and the
courts is the apathetic tone of public opinion, which is the final
arbiter of the question. In the technical sense, the Amendment is still
a part of the supreme law of the land. But as a phenomenon of the social
consciousness, a rule of conduct, no matter how authoritatively
promulgated by the nation, if not supported by the force of public
opinion, is already in process of repeal.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account