us history civil rights movement. historical developments dred scott v. sanford (1857) involved...

16
US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT

Upload: harold-garrett

Post on 25-Dec-2015

221 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

U S H I S T O RY

CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT

Page 2: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Historical Developments

• Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)• Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to

free states in the North. After his master’s death, he attempted to sue for freedom.

• Case eventually made it to the Supreme Court, which held in an opinion by Roger B. Taney that African Americans were not citizens and therefore had no legal standing to sue.

• Emancipation Proclamation (1863)• An executive order issued by Lincoln following the Union

Army’s victory in the Battle of Antietam • Declared all slaves in the Confederacy liberated (did not apply

to slave states under Union control) • Prompted many slaves to escape the South to gain their

freedom

Page 3: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Historical Developments

• 13th Amendment (1865)• Abolished slavery and involuntary servitude in the United

States

• Black Codes• Southerners sought to undermine blacks’ newfound liberty

via legislation• Mississippi and South Carolina passed the first codes. • Mississippi’s forced blacks to have signed a labor contract

for the upcoming year by January or face imprisonment while South Carolina’s mandated that blacks could only work as farmers or servants unless they paid a fine

Page 4: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Historical Developments

• 14th Amendment (1868)• Granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the

United States, assured “equal protection of the laws,” and made it illegal to deprive a person of life, liberty, and property without due process

• 15th Amendment (1870)• Prevents state or federal governments from denying

suffrage because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude

Page 5: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Historical Developments

• Jim Crow Laws • Again, white southerners, who by the late 1870’s had

reestablished political control, attempted to dull the effect of these laws

• Mandated de jure segregation in all public facilities reconciled the laws with the 14th Amendment by claiming the facilities “separate but equal”

• Disenfranchised blacks by instituting poll taxes, literacy tests, and property requirements whites were often exempt from these barriers because of grandfather clauses

• Still, many poor whites were disenfranchised as well • KKK used intimidation and violence to deter blacks from

voting

Page 6: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Historical Developments

• Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)• Upheld segregation laws as long as facilities were

“separate but equal”

• Lynchings • Extrajudicial killings carried out by mobs, most frequently

against blacks • Anti-lynching laws were often discussed in Congress but

failed to pass

Page 7: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Historical Developments

• 19th Amendment (1920)• Granted women the right to vote

• Brown v. Board (1954)• Overturned the “separate but equal” holding of the

Plessy case, declaring segregation inherently unequal• Years would pass before the South fully implemented

desegregation

Page 8: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Brown v. Board

• At the time, nation spent 10x more on white schools than black schools

• Litigated by the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), an organization which advocated for civil rights through the judicial system

• Thurgood Marshall argued the case before the Supreme Court later became the first African-American Supreme Court justice

• Oliver Brown was the plaintiff in the case; his daughter, Linda, had to walk 6 blocks to get to the bus stop in order to commute to the nearest segregated school, 21 blocks away. The closest white school was only 7 blocks away.

Page 9: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Desegregation & Resistance

• Brown II case (1955) ordered desegregation to be carried out with “all deliberate speed” • Many states used the ambiguous language to

delay school integration • Some state officials promised absolute resistance to

desegregation efforts• Texas’ governor used the Texas Rangers to stymie

integration• 1963: Alabama governor's inaugural address

• Within a year, however, more than 500 school districts had desegregated

Page 10: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Central High School Crisis

• In 1957, the school district in Little Rock, AR began to desegregate

• Gov. Orval Faubus disagreed with the decision and ordered the Arkansas National Guard to prevent the “Little Rock Nine,” the nine African-American students who had volunteered to attend integrated schools, from going to class

• A federal judge ordered the governor to admit the students

• Initially, Pres. Eisenhower did not support enforcing states’ compliance with the law

• Crisis at Central High caused him to change his mind

Page 11: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Central High School Crisis

• Eisenhower placed the Arkansas National Guard under federal control and sent a thousand troops to Little Rock to ensure the students’ safe passage• Still, the students faced constant harassment,

intimidation, and threats of violence • Following the end of the school year, the governor

closed Central High School

Page 12: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Civil Rights Act of 1957

• First civil rights law since Reconstruction • Gave attorney general greater power over school

desegregation • Main goal of law was to ensure blacks’ voting rights • Also, allowed blacks to serve on juries• Lacked enforcement mechanisms, so it was generally ineffective

• Sen. Strom Thurmond from South Carolina led the longest one-person filibuster in history (over 24 hours) in a failed attempt to block passage of the bill

• Lyndon B. Johnson (D-Tex), then the Senate Majority Leader, was one of the key players in bringing the law to fruition

Page 13: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Discussion

• Why might someone resist desegregation efforts?• Why do you think racism exists?• Does racism parallel with other “isms?” • Is it possible to eliminate racism? How?

Page 14: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Bus Discrimination

• Blacks were forced to enter at the front of the bus to pay, exit, then re-board and sit at the rear • Mistreated by bus drivers who simultaneously

greeted whites respectfully • Black nurses or maids with white children were

allowed to sit in seats designated for whites• Many bus routes in the South served a

predominantly black clientele. Regardless, blacks could not sit in the front of the bus; even if there were no other seats available, most bus drivers forced them to stand

Page 15: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Rosa Parks

• Parks was a seamstress and NAACP officer• Led a life of activism

• On December 1, 1955 she took a seat in the first row of the “colored” section of the bus• The bus filled up quickly and Parks, along with 3 other African-

Americans, were asked to give up their seats• The others assented; Parks, however, refused• The bus driver called the cops and had Parks arrested She went to jail

briefly but was released on bail • Parks had had trouble with the same bus driver previously. In 1943, she

refused to exit the bus and re-board in the rear after paying her fare. The driver forced her to leave.

• http://www.salon.com/2013/02/03/rosa_parks_i_had_been_pushed_as_far_as_i_could_stand/

Page 16: US HISTORY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. Historical Developments Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Involved Scott, a slave who had been brought by his owner to free

Montgomery Bus Boycott

• Following Parks’ protest, African-American leaders decided to boycott Montgomery buses to protest their mistreatment

• Formed the Montgomery Improvement Association to organize the boycott MLK, a 26 year-old minister at a local church, was elected to lead the group

• African-Americans took cabs, walked, and organized carpools for transportation

• Many whites responded with violence: King’s home and several black churches were bombed• King pleaded with his followers to avoid violent resistance

• Boycotts were extremely effective, slicing revenues • 381 day boycott ended with the 1956 Supreme Court decision outlawing

bus segregation • Demonstrated the effectiveness of nonviolent protest and sparked further

resistance