Plessy Dissent

    Justice Harlan writes about his side, or the losing side, of the argument in hopes of convincing others in the board how poor their decision was. He wanted to show that not everyone on the board had the same thought process as the majority rule. His dissent could even spark another case to bring up the same information and reassess the given decision.

     Writing it out not only helps him remember what he thought during the trial, but also shows others his thought process. People are more likely to believe you if you have the facts to back up your opinion, which Harlan has lots of.

Personally, I think that Judge Harlan makes a good argument, but that might just be me putting my own two sense into the court. He makes the argument that the majority was incorrect in their decision, because it is not upholding the personal liberties and/or the civil rights that are supposed to be given to everyone. He states that the constitution is "colorblind", but the legislature acts differently. 

    In 1896, if others heard his argument, many of them would call him crazy and say that he is incorrect, because they are scared of letting blacks and white mingle openly together. In 2020, people would come to Justice Harlan with open arms and thank him for standing against the majority and for fighting for what is right. 

    As society has progressed, we have learned the error of our ways. Society finally realized that everyone SHOULD be treated equally no matter of race, religion, gender, etc. Most of us share a common goal of wanting to be the best versions of ourselves and making a mark in the world, and it is hard to be great if you are letting little things get in the way.

    Harlan's dissent sheds light that there was hope back then for African Americans, and that they were never alone. It shines a beacon on the fact that they would soon be closer to justice.

Bakke vs. Regents of the University of California

     For background reasons, this case talks of the California Board of Education setting up a quota system to set aside sixteen spots for minorities in the University of California Medical School at Davis to get rid of racial exclusions in the field. Allan Bakke was thirty-five year old white man who was rejected twice from the school. Bakke's claim was that he was way more qualified than any of the minorities who were allowed admission, and tried to argue that he was excluded because of his race.

    Now, while we all can see that the "basis of race" argument is completely absurd, here are some other arguments that the regents had. First off, the school wanted to have fairness for those who may not have had access to the same resources in their life. This affirmative action program would not only expand academic variety, but it would also bring more students of color into top level schools. Also, this policy was not just based on race, since it also had to do with those who struggled economically. This final question that I found interesting and that I will leave you with is "Why didn't other people who didn't get into the school sue, as well?"

    On Bakke's side his main defense was that he was a victim of "reverse discrimination", which does not exist, and that he had better qualifications, test scores and grades, than those who were actually accepted into the university. His defense states that this violated Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which deals with equal protections in schools. He also tries to state that he was discriminated against because of his age, considering he was 35 upon the time of the case. Bakke's last argument was that he was the perfect example of a well-rounded student since he had the grades, the scores, and that he served in the military, which caused his application to the university at such a late age.

    I will leave you with the facts to determine whether you support the court's decision to allow Bakke to attend the school and to rule the quota system as unconstitutional. Also, it was decided that race could be a factor that was used in the admissions process.

The Peoples Influence on Constitutional Law

     The Supreme Court has always had the first say in cases that they undertook, but several legal scholars have dove deeper in the what truly happens behind the scenes. It was found that plenty of "non-judicial actors," which could be anyone from activists to legislators, were actually big influences on interpreting the constitutional law and creating limits on the ones that we abide by everyday.

    When we think of constitutional law you think it was decided by a bunch of old white men sitting on the Supreme Court, but there was impact from those who are everyday people, such as you and I. This article illustrates that we do not spend enough time focusing on how much these "social actors" who work with the judiciary system to shape the law into what it has become today. I leave you with this hard sought after question which is whether we should change the judicial system from a strict interpretation of the constitution to a more representative interpretation. 

    Michael Gerdhart created the theory of non-judicial precedents which are essentially beliefs from the constitution that were set in the previous judicial system to control certain affairs. His proof was that these "non-judicial actors" would go around sparking conversations about what they felt strongly about. They would talk to officials with high standings and preach about how the public feels about certain issues happening in and around the court system.

    In the end, the Supreme Court system is not just made up of the opinions of those on the court, but can also be highly influenced by those who have enough of a voice to share it with others.

March on Washington

    To set the scene, its August 28th, 1963. Tension is in the air because the civil rights era has reached its peak of atrocity. Thousands gather in front of the Lincoln memorial to support the ideas of desegregation in public accommodations. Some important issues that they tackled were segregation in public schools, and unfair treatment of black workers in employment opportunities.  Major leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr., A. Phillip Randolph, and Bayard Rustin attend this march to give speeches and show their support for the movement. Randolph started off by saying "when we leave, it will be to carry the civil rights revolution home with us..." which was very true considering the impact of this march.

    This march left a revolutionary effect on the civil rights movement. It sparked interest its many of others to truly fight for justice in the world. This helped other who were fighting realize that they are not alone and would never be alone.

    It was after this march that MLK gave his famous I have a dream speech where he basically talks of how he dreams for black people to be treated the same as the white people. King definitely had no idea how much of an impact his speech would have on the movement overall. Others were inspired by King's dream of one day being 'Free at last!'. 

    The March on Washington is an excellent example of using your First Amendment freedoms to have your voice be heard. The march consisted of several speeches that express every U.S. citizens freedom of speech without government regulation. Also, the individuals in the crowd expressed their freedom of assembly and their freedom of petition by hosting peaceful protests in order to bring attention to ideas that they felt were important. Lastly, the freedom of press was illustrated through the use of news channels and newspapers to show the effect of the march to others and to even convince them to join.

    The effects of the march was that Kennedy approved the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Klansville USA

    Klansville USA was based on the great state of North Carolina. The state that I was born and raised in was nicknamed "Klansville". The KKK started around the same time as civil rights movements, such as the lunch counter sit ins. 

   The KKK was started after the civil war to prank the newly freed slaves. This was a disgusting racial hate group used to terrorize black people. It started out as small groups in the south, and it grew popularity from a film called The Birth of A Nation. This film increased the excitement around the group for less wealthy white people, and their recruitment number increased. They are most commonly known for the white hoods and cross burning. The North Carolina branch in the 1960s was leaded by Bob Jones, whose says he feels like he was made to be a Klan leader since his moms was pregnant with him during a KKK parade. Jones became the most prominent leader for the NC chapter and increased the number of members significantly.

 In The Birth of A Nation, black people were seen as inferior and as background characters. This helped fuel the racial fury of white people considering blacks were shown as useless in their films. The film was so well known that it was displayed at the White House to current president, Woodrow Wilson.

    Overall the KKK will forever be known as the most popular racially-motivated attack group in the U.S. and hopefully it will always be remembered for its negative actions.

Assassinations of Civil Rights Era

    The Civil Rights Era was full of influential people who were so devoted to making a change in their society. I am very grateful to say that there were people who were fearless enough to stand up for what they believed in no matter how much violence and anger was pushed against them.

     The worst part of it all is that their time will eventually come to an end, but what they leave behind is something truly remarkable. I will talk of the assassinations of the inspirations, Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy, and Malcolm X, who all left a legacy bigger than they could have imagined.

    Martin Luther King Jr went to Tennessee on the 3rd of April, 1968 with plans of helping sanitation workers in Memphis fight against the mistreatment of the black workers that following Monday. April 4th, as he was about to leave his motel to have dinner with Samuel Kyles, he decided to go talk to some members of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who were down in the parking lot. He steps out onto the balcony, of his room, and a shot is fired. This one shot hits King in his face and he falls to the ground. Nearby people rush him to the hospital, but he is declared dead an hour later. This day was a day of mourning for people all over America, as declared by President Lyndon B. Johnson. A police investigation led to the 99 years sentence of James Earl Ray in 1969. A lot of conspiracy arose around this case for Ray tried to say he was framed, and their was thoughts of a possible government interference. In the end Ray, died in jail on April 23rd, 1998, so the case was not ever 100% confirmed.

    King's death sparked numerous deaths, and led to a lot of property destruction, but most importantly it lit a fire in the butt of those who fought so hard alongside King. His time may have been done but this was just the beginning of his journey as a civil rights activist. He was such an inspiration to those to keep fighting for equality and to keep having a dream.

    President John F. Kennedy was riding around Texas to campaign for his second run for presidency. He started in San Antonio, continued to Fort Worth, and ended in Dallas. The president, his wife, and Governor Connally were all packed into a motorcade headed to the Trade Mart, which was where the president was supposed to give a speech at. The open top car turns into the Dealey Plaza and, suddenly, shots were fired. Kennedy had been struck in several places and the governor was shot in the back. The car sped off to the hospital but sadly it was too late for the president. His killer was decided to be Lee Harvey Oswald, and as he was being taken to jail, he was shot and killed by Jack Ruby.

    There was a lot of conspiracy surrounding his death too. Firstly, since President Kennedy was against any kind of racial inequality and was even close with MLK Jr. there seemed to be a hit put out on him. Many worried that a racist person was so upset that he supported black affairs that he was shot for this very reason. Another theory was that Oswald had an accomplice with him, who stood on top of a nearby hill. In the end, Kennedy's outspokenness to protect African Americans was quite impactful, for many white males would never dare do such a thing during this time.

    Lastly we have the assassination of Malcolm X, another popular activist during the Civil Rights Era. 
Malcolm has just been through tough times, having his house bombed, and forcing his family to hide for their own safety. He was now living in a hotel in New York city, but he says that he lives "like a man who is dead already."  Malcolm checked out of his hotel room, and got ready to speak in front of the new members of his Organization of Afro-American Unity in the Audubon Ballroom. He gets on the stage, and before he can even greet the crowd, a fight breaks out. His two bodyguards focus on trying to stop the fight, and a man shoots Malcom right in the chest. He falls over, while the killer escapes. He was sent to a nearby hospital where his was pronounced dead.

    Malcolm's assassination also had lots of controversy surrounding it. The suspects were Thomas 15X Johnson, Norman 3X Butler, and Talmadge Hayer, who were all members of the Nation of Islam. The Nation of Islam did previously end on bad terms with Malcolm. These men were sent to 20 years to life in prison, but there was very little evidence to imprison them anyway. Later on, Hayer cleared the men but the judge didn't feel it  necessary to reopen the case. More research questioned why there was little security for Malcolm and why he was being tracked. Malcolm left quite a legacy that wasn't appreciated until a while alter. He led so many others to fight for their rights, because "power in the defense of freedom is greater than power in behalf of tyranny and oppression." 

    All of these gentlemen were special to creating a long lasting effect from the Civil Rights Movement. Without their hard work, many of us would not be where we are today.

Brown vs Board of Education

Segregating schools not only effects kids emotionally, but also it hurts the economy. You know the economy that we all have to share? If one of us is not doing well, it can impact the rest of us. First off, black people who are segregated end up going to schools that give them less opportunities, less resources, and less qualified teachers. This results in them not being able to get successful jobs such as being accountants, inventors, or anything else that could directly affect the economy. Many of them do not learn the basic skills that they need to be a functioning person in society. They cannot help flourish the economy if you do not give them the proper tools to do so.  Segregating schools leads to an increase in the rate of poverty, which can negatively affect the economy. Also, this gives African Americans a badge of inferiority that gets passed onto their kids, so nothing economical ever gets better in the future. They are just stuck in the same low-income situation as their parents. The neighborhoods around these segregated schools that you force black kids to go to usually have less high school graduates and less students who get employed afterwards. Each year that a black child goes to a desegregated school, their adult income increases by 3.6 percent. I’m not seeing a problem here except for the color of their skin, apparently, for if a white child was increasing their income, you all would be cheering. Yet, you want to sit here and segregate them which in turn hurts you more than it helps.

Reconstructing America

     The Reconstruction Era is known as the most significant time of the American civil rights. This period starts off with lots of questions, for it began with General Robert E Lee surrendering to General Ulysses S Grant. This ultimately meant the end of the civil war, and was supposed to mean the end of slavery, but this era proved quite differently. This era treated African Americans worse than they had ever imagined.

    The civil war ruined any possible chance of the states all coming together. The South states that the Union is trying to take away their rights, while the Union states that they simply want to abolish slavery. After the war, the Southern economy was ruined, for they had no slaves to make a profit off of.

    The initial idea behind the Reconstruction Era was to rebuild this new United States without slavery, and to figure out how to deal with the effects of the end of the civil war. Lincoln is president during this time, but not for long, for he is shot, by John Wilkes Booth, before he can really put his ideas into effect. After Lincoln is shot, Andrew Johnson succeeds him, and this is where things really go down hill.

    Johnson had quite different views from Lincoln and Congress. Now, before Johnson, there was the Freedman's Bureau, which gave newly freed men 40 acres of land to make profit off of. Johnson had been making pardons to confederates for land, so he told Oliver Howard to give that land back to the confederates that he had pardoned. This of course upset those who were already living on and working on that land, but there was nothing that they could do. 

    There were several other instances of black people being treated unfairly during the Reconstruction. For starters, black codes, which included a labor contract for black adults, existed to limit the freedom of black people. Those who refused to sign the contract were fined, and if they could not pay the fine, they would be auctioned off until the paid off the fine. Also, the KKK, which served the the same purpose as slave patrols, existed to monitor and enforce rules on black people. Riots in Memphis and New Orleans, which included lots of white people going around and killing innocent black people, led to lots of uproar in the United States.

    The Reconstruction Era teased black people with the promise of freedom and the hope of a better life. It really just lit a fire in the South's butt, and inspired them to figure out new ways to get blacks back under their control. Andrew Johnson also proved himself to be on the opposite side of freedom for black and for the unifying of the states.

Plessy Vs Ferguson

     Plessy versus Ferguson is one of the most discussed court cases in all of history. This is mainly because it established the "separate but equal" mantra that we all know too well. Today, I'm going to explain how Ferguson had the stronger argument, even though I do not agree with the ruling.

    First off, a big thing that helped their case was that Plessy was fully aware that he was breaking the law. This served for the purpose of allowing the prosecutors to say that allowing him to get away with this would let others think it is okay for them to do it too. Since most white people were scared of black people, they were completely fine with the law. To support the religious side of the court, Ferguson provided that God made them separate races for a reason. They believe that God separated blacks and whites from the beginning, and disobeying that would be a sin. 

    Plessy does state that the law gives black people a "badge of inferiority" that even their kids have to live with.  Ferguson says that the state had worked very hard to integrate black people into everyday society. The prosecution continued to state that the law does not show inferiority, but then continues to state that blacks have allowed themselves to be seen as inferior, which seems to contradict each other. 

    Since many whites agree with this Louisiana law, they believe that segregation does not equal to unlawful discrimination. Ferguson presumes that the law is a necessity for society to be balanced and to work correctly. Black people are given the same amenities as their white counterparts; therefore, the separation should be allowed. They state that black rights are not being taken away, for they can still vote and serve on a jury, so Plessy should just take the repercussions and move on with his life. 

Plessy versus Ferguson, one of the most influential court cases ever for America, was not morally correct, but Ferguson did have stronger evidence and more support for their side than Plessy. In the end, Plessy was forced to pay a $25 fine for a law that the broke. This law was eventually spread all throughout America and changed it forever.

Santa Clara Railroad Case

  Today, you know the Fourteenth Amendment as being the one that gives all citizens "equal protection of the laws," but have you ever thought about where corporations fall into this? A railroad company in California had its own run in with the specifics of one of these so called "freedom amendments."

The year is 1886. The Southern Pacific Railroad Company is upset about being taxed by the state of California, and about the difference in amount of exceeding mortgages. They used the fact that the state constitution says that they are only allowed to be taxed on "the franchise, roadway, roadbed, rails, and rolling stock." The company also claimed that the outstanding mortgages were not subtracted correctly from its property value. A decision could not be made on their own so Santa Clara County took it to the state court.

    The county's argument was that since it could tax the land with the fences, then it could tax the additional value of the land that was incorporated with the fences. The Railroad Company then took it to the federal district court, which sided in favor of the company. The county had it brought to the Supreme Court.

    A support for Southern Pacific's claim was, in fact, their own lawyer. Roscoe Conkling, who was actually there for the drafting of the Fourteenth Amendment, states that he remembers the amendment being changed from "citizens" to "persons" so that it could include corporations, or natural persons, too. He even had a journal from his time with the drafting committee.

An illustration of Edward H. Harriman

    Unfortunately for the company, this was all a hoax. It turns out that corporations were never considered from the committee. 

    Morrison Waite, a Chief Justice on the Supreme Court, actually worked on this case. In his argument he states, when talking about whether corporations are included in the 14th Amendment, that "We are all under the opinion that it does." Its clear from the beginning that the court believed that the county wrongly taxed the company. The court decided that taxing the company differently than private property owners was completely biased and violates the 14th amendment.

In the end, the court sided with the railroad company and decided that corporations would also be "guaranteed the right to liberty, property, and due process of the law and for legal purposes may be regarded as persons." This was a major turning point in Supreme Court history, and so many have never heard of it.

An overall summary of the court case

Presidential Election of 1860

     As I heard my classmates go one by one in front of the class, one of the presentations stood out to me. It was the one on the presidential election of 1860, which had such a lasting impact on history. For those who do not know, this was when Abraham Lincoln was elected. The big controversy around his election was that he did not support slavery. Southerners were scared that he would outlaw slavery, so they swore that they would leave the union if he was elected.

Presidential Candidates & their stances

    In the 1860 Republican National Convention, Lincoln was up against William Seward, a senator for New York, and was selected after three sets of voting. The Southern and the Northern democrats were split up over the idea of slavery; the South wanted to continue slavery, while the North opposed it. There were several arguments over which candidate they would choose since slavery was such a big topic. The Northerners selected Stephen Douglas for his opposition of slavery, and the Southerners selected John Breckinridge, a pro-slavery candidate. The Constitutional Union Party, which was made of upset Democrats, Unionists, and past Whigs, selected John Bell as their candidate. His policy was on creating the Missouri Compromise to gain the support of Democratic voters who were upset about the division of slavery.

Illustration of how votes were distributed

On November 6th of 1860, people went to go cast their votes for their top choice. Lincoln completely dominated the Northern states and won with 180 votes from the electoral college. The split in the Democratic voters prevented both candidates from gaining enough votes to win. Douglas ended up with only 12 electoral votes.

    What is so amazing about Lincoln's victory is that he won without the help from southern states, and he ended up having less than 40 percent of the popular votes.

 After his election, the Unites States was torn to pieces, the southern states seceded, and thus the civil war begins. This election has been the most controversial one until the election of 2016.