The Jim Crowe Laws

Despite the end of the Civil War, division in the United States resulted in several volatile decades involving the struggles over state rights to govern and thus legislate discriminatory laws that became known collectively as Jim Crowe laws. Reconstruction of the South initially seeded hope for black equality and protection of their rights in the eyes of many. Congressional efforts only partially succeeded in this and the divisions amongst and within government entities including the White House and the Supreme Court negated most of these. Reconstruction, while succeeding in establishing an intact union of self-governing states, left the former slaves vulnerable to suppression by white supremacists despite their freedom from slavery. Jim Crowe laws developed which formalized discrimination throughout the south. The development of Jim Crowe laws epitomized the failure to secure and protect the African American economic outlook and right to vote, be educated and live equally amongst fellow white citizens and resulted due to the division and weaknesses of the federal government, the violent political terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan, and Supreme Court decisions which sterilized the 14th and 15th Amendments and Civil Rights Act of 1875.

Before the Civil War came to an end in April of 1865, signs of hope for black people were blooming. As stated in A People & A Nation by Norton and et al, President Abraham Lincoln and the Congress had begun working towards securing the freedom and security of African Americans. The 13th Amendment was passed guaranteeing the freedom of slaves. Congress also created the Freedmen’s Bureau (Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands) that would for the next four years concern itself with social welfare, education, property management and labor arrangements in the South (2005, pp. 422-423).

By the end of 1865, the defeated southern states were found in turmoil, unadjusted to the 13th Amendment’s abolition of slavery, the dismantlement of their governments and the economical ruin war had left. Abraham Lincoln’s southern Vice President, Andrew Johnson had taken office after his assassination. According to Vincent Harding, he was a “stubborn, insecure and volatile man” who was “one of the most unfortunate leaders” for Reconstruction (2003, p. 12). Johnson really didn’t care for the Southern elite, nor did he care much about black equality, but he did want an intact union (Norton, 2005, pp. 427-428). He forged forward with his own plans for Reconstruction while Congress was in recess by designating provisional governors who called constitutional conventions, and demanded southerners who wanted amnesty or pardon swear an oath of allegiance, although the Confederate elite had to request personal pardon from him individually (Norton, 2005, pp. 428-429). Johnson’s plan basically ushered in the old south as he granted pardons, opposed the Freedmen’s Bureau and returned lands to white landowners. Norton’s example of Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens’ election to the U.S. Senate (2005, p. 429) illustrates well the return of a racist status quo under Johnson’s direction. The southern states could then work to keep the freedmen in their previous position by reforming slave code into black code (Norton, 2005, p. 429). The ability of freedmen to acquire or lease property was restricted by many southern states which also set up vagrancy laws that forced these homeless black folks into what was essentially servitude (Harding, 2003, p. 14). These laws foreshadowed an attitude towards legalizing discrimination that would prevail much after Reconstruction ended.

Despite the split in Congress between northern Democrats who supported Johnson, Republicans who wanted little to do with Reconstruction and Radical Republicans who wanted major southern reform (Norton, 2005, p. 430), Radical Republicans led by Thaddeus Stephens succeeded in passing the 14th Amendment in June of 1866, which, as summarized by Eric Foner:

"prohibited the states from abridging the equality before the law of American citizens, provided for a reduction in representation in Congress should any state deprive male citizens of the right to vote, excluded Confederates who had previously taken a constitutional oath from holding state or federal office, and prohibited payment of the Confederate debt" (Foner, 2003, p.22).

Lack of compromise by Democrats and the lack of cooperation with Congress that Johnson displayed by vetoing both a Civil Rights Act and a bill prolonging the Freedmen Bureau’s existence as well as his encouraging southern states not to ratify the 14th Amendment, led to Republicans establishing majorities in the House of Representatives and House of Senate during the election of 1866 (Norton, 2005, pp. 431-432).

Resistance to the Republican Congress’ plans for Reconstruction by Johnson’s southern governments led to the Reconstruction Acts of 1867 and 1868. They brought the south under control of the Union Army, restricted Confederate leaders from voting, gave the right to vote to freedman, required ratification of the 14th Amendment, and Congressional approval of state constitutions (Norton, 2005, p. 433). Stephens wanted more, however, plans he developed to distribute 40 acre plots to the freedmen to provide them with more economic security were met with resistance from northerners who wanted to keep government action down, and businessmen concerned about private property rights (Norton, 2005, p. 434).

With a Republican congress in place, Johnson’s power for the remainder was greatly diminished, with hostilities escalating to the point where three attempts to impeach him were made, the last shy of succeeding by only one Senate vote. As it was, Republican General Ulysses S. Grant won the presidential office running on a platform that supported Reconstruction and black suffrage while the Democrats ran a defiantly racist campaign. Once in office Grant’s support of Reconstruction was variable. Southern power increased as the number of troops controlling military zones established by the First Reconstruction Act continued on a steady decline (Norton, 2005, pp. 435-436).

By 1870, the newly elected southern governments were predominantly Republican, in great part due to the participation of blacks in the election process. The new Constitutions’ increased democracy, supported education and social services, and increased women’s rights (Norton, 2005, p. 437). The Republican’s greatest challenge, however, the redistribution of land, was one they could never overcome (Norton, 2005, p. 439). Despite these initial reforms, the Republicans ended up weakening themselves by kowtowing to the Democratic white in attempts to avoid disenfranchising them (Norton, 2005, p. 438), to the extent that their greatest support, the blacks, were the ones who would be disenfranchised.

Hostility from the white Democrats remained high as they alleged that blacks dominated politics (despite the disproportionately low number of blacks holding office), and corruption reigned in the Republican governments (while sometimes true of Republicans and blacks, also true of Democrats) (Norton, 2005, p. 440). Relocated northerners, known as Carpetbaggers, and poorer white southerners who supported reform, called Scalawags, were ostracized from southern society (Norton, 2005, p. 439). The Ku Klux Klan was formed in an underground movement to suppress reform through violent acts against reformers and African Americans (Norton, 2005, p. 440). Hundreds of acts of violence and even murder were committed in a methodical, terrorist rage that would remain a great part of suppressing the position of blacks and maintaining white supremacy in the south for decades despite anti-Klan legislation passed by Congress in the early 1870’s (Norton, 2005, p. 441).

Southerners were gaining power again, and they were hot to keep any power from the black man. The Supreme Court gave them the room they needed to formalize the indirect removal of rights that had been granted to freedmen. The Supreme Court greatly diminished the strength of the 14th Amendment, beginning with the Slaughter House cases of 1869, when the court separated state and national citizenships, limiting the rights of national citizens to interstate travel and travel in American waters. The court also stated the Amendment did not affect the states ability to govern on local and domestic levels thus handing issues of civil rights back to the states (Norton, 2005, p. 445). The Supreme Court further weakened the 14th Amendment in 1876, when a meeting of black folks was attacked by whites in Louisiana; the Supreme Court overturned the U.S. vs. Cruikshank conviction of the offenders, declaring it was the states role, not the federal governments, to protect citizen’s rights (Norton, 2005, p. 445).

Congress made one more attempt to protect the rights of African Americans before the mid 1870’s expansion and economic concerns took national focus further away from the issues of Reconstruction and black equality. The Civil Rights Act in 1875, guaranteeing equal “accommodation” and preventing segregation in public facilities and transportation was passed, however, Democratic power in Congress was increasing by then, and the final document was anemic and without means of enforcement (Norton, 2005, p. 443). Adding to the demise of reform efforts, the results of the 1876 presidential election were disputed, leading to the first 15 member electoral commission. With Republican’s holding the Congressional majority, they also gained the deciding position in the Commission. Tensions were high, however, and a filibuster by the Democrat-controlled House was feared. Republican Rutherford B. Hayes did get the office but only after agreement to increased economic support and removal of troops in the South. In any case, Hayes did not support Reconstruction and his election marked the end federal attempts at southern reform (Norton, 2005, p. 446).

Attempts by the south to subdue black citizens did not end. Initially, after Reconstruction, blacks did retain their right to vote, and some held office as well, despite the violent racism that continued to be waged against them. However, in 1876, the Supreme Court next attacked the 15th Amendment, when, in U.S vs. Reese, Congress was denied the ability to enforce voting rights other than in the explicit cases of race, color or history of servitude. The southern legislatures were free to establish poll taxes, and to limit the right to vote to the literate and property holders - laws aimed suppressing the vote of blacks and the poor (Norton, 2005, pp. 550-551).

The Supreme Court continued to empower white supremacy. In the 1870’s, the judicial body decreed the 14th Amendment applied to state governments who denied citizens their rights, but not to individuals or other establishments. A similar argument was used by the court to crush the Civil Rights Act in 1883 when they said the federal government did not have the right to prevent segregation by individual citizens (Norton, 2005, p. 551). A doctrine of “separate but equal” was solidified in 1896 in the case of Plessy vs. Ferguson and again in 1899 in the case of Cummins vs. County Board of Education. In the first case a man of mixed race challenged Louisiana law by sitting in an all-white railroad car. He was arrested and convicted, and his conviction upheld by the Supreme Court that maintained that separation based on color did not diminish the legal equality of the races. In the second case the court used this argument to support segregation in schools as well (Norton, 2005, pp. 551-552).

The stage was now set for the south to legally discriminate against people of color. Decades of struggle over the rights of black Americans were essentially fruitless as southern states created endless laws, collectively known as Jim Crowe laws, dictating what black people could and couldn’t do, where they could go and how they could live. From the beginning of the end of slavery, the strength of racism persisted over the weaknesses of a divided nation. The multiple attempts to guarantee African Americans their rights and security that have been outlined here were beaten down by division, violence and a biased judicial system although they did, fortunately, plant seeds for the fight for equality in the next century.