HOL Review

HOL Review - Before Civil Rights cases of 1883 States in...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Before Civil Rights cases of 1883 States in the south passed laws that allowed for Jim Crow segregation - Blacks cannot serve on juries - Case where a man wanted the court to overturn its decision because he was not given a racially mixed jury - Would have had to prove that the court actually discriminated in choosing its jury BLACK CASES Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) All that has to be done to justify the actions, is say that the state has enacted a reasonable regulation - Previous case similar, but got struck down because of interstate commerce - Train company agreed with Plessy – hoped law would be struck down o Did not want to add more cars – economic reasoning o Collusive lawsuit Brown says that what we are doing is reasonable , which it is - No such thing as a badge of slavery – black people merely think that this is so - There will never be natural affinities Cummings v. School Board (1899) Georgia school district, Black people were paying taxes and wanted these to pay for a high school for their black children - Harlan argued that there was not enough money for a school for blacks AND a school for whites NATIVE AMERICAN CASES Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903) - not given full rights over their property - ASIA CASES Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) Facts of the case - Unlawful to erect a Laundromat that is made out of wood - Almost every single laundry was made of wood and owned by Chinese immigrants - The law divided owners into second class citizens Persons are protected under the 14 th amendment NOT JUST CITIZENS The immunities clause talks about citizens, but as long as you are a person, you are protected - Placed large emphasis on property rights and thus won the case for Chinese
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Wong Kim Ark – Chinese exclusion Act – 1880 “yellow peril” Facts of the case - Wong kim traveled to China for a visit and was denied reentry - If he were not an American citizen, he would have been excluded under the Chinese exclusion act - Born in the United States, therefore a citizen - 14 th Amendment gives him right to due process since it guarantees him citizenship - Wants to compare revised statutes of 1866 acts before it was revised to point out that they actually mean the same thing – subject to the jurisdiction thereof - “Of every race and color” – people do have rights despite changes and we need to take a broad view In Wong Kim Case – worried about citizens who are abroad - Congress passed a law saying that children born from parents who are citizens are in fact citizens - Wong Kim won the case Oregon v. Charley Lee Quong - another case that exemplified anti-chinese sentiment by not respecting the customs - Eugenecist movement Buck v Bell – (1927) is it right for a state to sterilize someone who is mentally deficient? Why was there a decline in crime in the late 19
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 12

HOL Review - Before Civil Rights cases of 1883 States in...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online