The Southern Case for School SegregationKilpatrick, James Jackson
History
The Southern Case for School Segregation
Kilpatrick, James Jackson
African Americans -- Segregation; Segregation -- Southern States
Counsel for the Negro plaintiffs, grappling with Question 1,
attempted to show that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended by its
framers and adopters to have a “broad, general scope.” John W. Davis
and T. Justin Moore, carrying the brunt of argument for the South,
relied upon the more tangible history of what actually happened in
terms of racially separate schools. Davis placed particular emphasis
upon the action of the Southern States in creating separate school
systems, without objection from Congress, even as they ratified the
amendment. Sumner and his fellow radicals might not have wanted to
challenge such Northern allies as Pennsylvania and Ohio, but “if
there were any place where sponsors of the amendment would have blown
the bugle for mixed schools, surely it would have been in those eight
States of Reconstruction legislation.”
Frankfurter kept asking the various attorneys to explain why the
Congress itself never had adopted legislation to prohibit the States
from maintaining racially separate schools. Defense counsel said the
Congress had no power to do so; attorneys for the Negro plaintiffs
said Congress had the power, but opponents of segregation never had
had the votes. Frankfurter put an embarrassing question to J. Lee
Rankin, who as Assistant Attorney General had joined forces with the
NAACP. “Realistically,” Frankfurter suggested, “the reason this case
is here is that action couldn’t be attained from Congress. Certainly
it would be much stronger from your point of view if Congress had
acted, wouldn’t it?”
Rankin agreed, but insisted that the court could achieve the desired
end by judicial pronouncement as well as the Congress could achieve
it by legislative action. Frankfurter persisted, taking judicial
notice of eighty-five years of segregation in Washington:
“Is it to be said fairly that not only did Congress not exercise the
power under Section 5 with reference to the States but, in a realm
in which it has exclusive authority, it enacted legislation to the
contrary? Are you saying that legislation does not mean anything but
what it does? It just segregates, that’s all.”
“Well, not exactly,” Rankin replied. “You have to find a conscious
determination by Congress that segregation was permitted under the
Fourteenth Amendment.”
“You think legislation by Congress is like the British
Empire--something that is acquired in a fit of absent-mindedness?”
“I wouldn’t make that charge before this court,” said Rankin stiffly,
“and I don’t want to be quoted in that manner.”
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