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
Determined as many of the Reconstruction promoters were to wipe out
every vestige of legally recognized race distinctions, they did not
allow their zeal to carry them to the extent of legislating as to the
social relations of the races. Georgia, probably fearing that some
legislature might attempt to enact such measures, in its Constitutions
of 1868[155] and 1877[156] had this general statement: “The social
status of the citizen shall never be the subject of legislation.” It
would seem, on first thought, that this requirement would defeat its own
purpose. If marriage is a social status and if legislation as to the
social status of the citizen is forever prohibited, how can a law
prohibiting intermarriage be constitutional? In a test case[157] that
arose in 1869 the Supreme Court of the State very neatly explained away
this apparently embarrassing situation by saying, in effect, that the
clause in the Constitution applied only to future legislation, and it
did not affect the law prohibiting intermarriage then in force. After
quoting that clause in the Constitution, the court went on to say: “In
so far as the marriage relation is connected with the social _status_,
the very reverse is true. That section of the Constitution forever
prohibits legislation of any character regulating or interfering with
the social status. It leaves social rights and _status_ where it finds
them. It prohibits the legislature from repealing any laws in existence,
which protect persons in the free regulation among themselves of matters
properly termed social, and it also prohibits the enactment of any new
laws on that subject in the future.” The Constitution of Alabama[9] of
1901 provides against possible meddling by the legislature with domestic
relations in more outspoken terms: “The legislature shall never pass any
law to authorize or legalize any marriage between any white person and a
Negro or descendant of a Negro.”
PRESENT STATE OF THE LAW AGAINST INTERMARRIAGE
The present situation as regards intermarriage is as follows:
Intermarriage between the Caucasian and other races is prohibited by the
Constitutions of six States, all Southern, namely: Alabama,[158]
Florida,[159] Mississippi,[160] North Carolina,[161] South
Carolina,[162] and Tennessee.[163] Intermarriage is prohibited by
statute also in the above States and in twenty other States and
Territories, namely: Alabama,[164] Arizona,[165] Arkansas,[166]
California,[167] Colorado,[168] Delaware,[169] Florida,[170]
Georgia,[171] Idaho,[172] Indiana,[173] Kentucky,[174] Louisiana,[175]
Maryland,[176] Mississippi,[177] Missouri,[178] Nebraska,[179]
Nevada,[180] North Carolina,[181] Oklahoma,[182] Oregon,[183] South
Carolina,[184] Tennessee,[185] Texas,[186] Utah,[187] Virginia,[188] and
West Virginia.[189]
TO WHOM THE LAWS APPLY
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account