Final Blog Post

 The First Amendment to the Constitution states that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (constitute project.org)

(today.harvardlaw.edu)

The strength of America’s democracy has always been contingent upon this amendment. It gives power to the people and allows for them to exercise their right to free speech, assemble, and petition. By exercising these rights, the people are also given the ability to change the constitution to further their rights. The First amendment has been used traditionally and still is today to support social movements, protests, expressive action, and more. During the civil rights movement, and before it, the supreme court had not always listened to people who have used the First Amendment to justify these rights granted to them in the Constitution.

Brown v. Board (1954) was a landmark case in the start of progress for African Americans during the civil rights movement. Although it only desegregated schools, it was the first time that the supreme court declared that ‘"separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” (supreme.justia.com). By overturning Plessy v. Ferguson, which ruled that it was constitutional to have ‘separate but equal facilities,’ it began the era of desegregation even though Jim Crow laws were technically still in place. 

(gse.harvard.edu)

Jim Crow laws were a way that public and private  places utilized the ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson to segregate based on race. Although it took a tumultuous effort to eradicate them, as they severely hindered the civil rights movement, one of the ways that got the most attention from the media was the organization of sit-ins.

(woolworthmuseum.co.uk)

In 1960, David Richmond, Joseph McNeil, Ezell Blair jr., and Franklin McCain, later known as the Greensboro Four, started the first-sit at a Woolworth’s restaurant in 1960. After being denied service because they were African American and having the police called on them because they refused to leave, they were unable to be arrested because they were causing no harm. This quickly caught the eye of the media and kickstarted a chain of sit-ins by college students Even though they were denied service, the sit-ins spread rapidly in the south. By exercising their First Amendment right of expressive action, they advanced the role of college students in the civil rights students, including white allies. 

(greensboro.com)

However, even expressive action was not always tolerated. Rosa Parks, an African American woman from Montgomery, Alabama, was arrested for refusing to give up her seat, designated for African Americans, on a city bus. When the white seats were taken up, the bus driver ordered the African Americans to give up their seats and stand so the white people could sit. Parks would not fold with her decision to remain in her seat. This situation shows that while expressive action had been working, not all law enforcement would enforce the law and would rather enforce the ideologies of the Jim Crow laws the south was notorious for. While this was not necessarily successful and seemed like a setback to the civil rights movement, this small act did gain attention and began the Montgomery bus boycott. 

(openculture.com)

As the number of people participating in the bus boycott grew, local ministers founded the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) to help with the organization of the movement, and Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Junior was elected the MIA’s president (history.com). 

On August 28, 1963, Dr. King, now a prominent leader in the civil rights movement, led the march on Washington, where desegregation was protested and he spoke his famous ‘I have a dream' speech. While his words were immensely powerful, they were not violent.“I have a dream that one day this nation will rise and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal” (npr.org). This was a key event in the civil rights movement because he showed through his speech that America’s foundational documents applied to everyone and that keeping a democracy was dependent upon it.

(britannica.com)

While the fight for civil rights is still ongoing, these events, whether they hindered or advanced the cause of civil rights, would not have been possible without the freedom granted in the First Amendment in the Constitution. These events primarily used the freedom of speech to exercise expressive action, which expresses beliefs in a non-violent way. Even though African Americans had been dealt much trauma, the only way they would get progress was by using expressive action, not only to keep themselves safe but to use their First Amendment rights as given by the constitution, regardless of how they were being misinterpreted.

(life.com)

https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/United_States_of_America_1992

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/347/483/

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/the-greensboro-sit-in

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/rosa-parks

https://today.law.harvard.edu/brilliant-and-highly-flawed/

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ed

http://www.woolworthsmuseum.co.uk/1950s-i-restaurant.htm

https://greensboro.com/news/local_news/in-1960-4-young-men-sat-at-the-woolworth-lunch-counter-in-downtown-greensboro-they/article_12c03848-fb56-5b7b-a487-b60cf7af13b0.html

https://www.openculture.com/2014/12/arrest-report-of-rosa-parks.html

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Martin-Luther-King-Jr

https://www.life.com/history/the-march-on-washington-power-to-the-people/

Blog Reveal Presentation

 With little censorship and the option of anonymous authorship, the internet has provided itself a novel method of exercising the right to free speech in the United States. The first amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” (law.cornell.edu). 

Not only does this apply to traditional media such as books and newspapers, but this amendment has stayed consistent with the ebbs and flows of media sources as internet usage became increasingly popular since the 1980s. This new media  platform where any information is at the access of your fingertips is an example of exercising these first amendment freedoms specifically because there is no government censorship of news media. While there is certainly inaccurate news floating around on the internet, seeking out reliable news is easier, faster, and keeps transparency between political leaders and the American public- the good, bad, and the ugly are exposed online, and nothing is truly private.  

Blogging and the internet have dramatically increased the spread of information and the amount of content available to people on specific topics. If Martin Luther King had access to blogging and the internet in his day, I think that he would use it to inform people about the violent acts of racism occurring and the unfiltered prejudice African Americans were experiencing. I think this could have changed the civil rights movement because there would be more awareness about what African Americans were experiencing, in comparison to the racism Americans experienced that largely went unnoticed or unheard in the media during King’s lifetime. 

(britannica.com)

The most noticeable way this could have changed the civil rights movement is because blogging gives everyone a space to voice their own opinion. By empowering people with an unfiltered platform of free speech, the movement would have been stronger with the increase of education about progressive ideologies and goals for African American progress, not only from leaders in the civil rights movement such as Martin Luther King but from everyday people who did not have a voice before besides protesting. 

(cnn.com)

The flip side of this is that there have been more violence. Racist people would certainly use the content in African Americans' blogs against them and as a reason for hate crimes. There would be two effects of having access to blogging and the internet during the civil rights movement: an increase in educational and progressive material and an increase in backlash and hate from racist people. However, the option of anonymous authorship could protect African American bloggers from receiving hate personally and outside of the  internet for the content of their posts.

 The most influential way that the internet and blogging perpetuate social movements is by creating platforms where people can campaign together and feel like they are parts of a community, such as getting to interact with other readers and the author on the posts. Blogs are also very personal and can present information in an educational and meaningful way that advocates for social movements. 

The other benefit of blogs having the potential to create the feeling of a community is that it strengthens the group as a whole, and brings people together when they get to have conversations and hear about other people’s opinions and experiences when they are all passionate about a social movement. 

The internet has and can immensely impact social movements. Aside from blogging, social media is becoming an increasingly powerful tool in social movements. People can share posts to educate each other and post to support others. However, there are instances where the posts shared are inaccurate and false information spreads easily.

 Currently, the internet provides easy access to a variety of content, but censorship on private websites and apps, specifically social media, has proven itself to be controversial. While blogging and increasing information through the internet could create advocacy for a new amendment or expose how the constitution is being abused, internet censorship by the government is likely to happen soon and will reflect the evolution of constitutional law. For example, if the government bans a news source for reported fake news, then they just violated the first amendment by limiting the freedom of the press. However, because of how used people are to censorship on most of the media platforms they use, they might not blink an eye at it. 

While blogging and the internet are powerful tools, the internet is not much different from other news sources such as television, newspaper, or radio, and allowing government censorship in one area of news media opens the door for censorship happening across all areas of news media. This can either go unnoticed or people on the internet, including bloggers and social media platforms, could be wary of censorship and keep their audience educated about it.

One of the hardest things was keeping up with my posts, but this was one of the most engaging classes I have taken this semester, and I enjoyed it because writing a blog is a unique and impactful way to use your voice to exercise your first amendment right of free speech. 

To future students, I would recommend for them to take notes and keep up with their blog posts.

 

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Martin-Luther-King-Jr

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/us/civil-rights-protests-then-now/index.html

 

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

 During President Lyndon Johnson's presidency (1963-1969), he began implementing affirmative action in order to open up more opportunities for African Amercians. Affirmative action banned discrimination such as intelligence tests to determine eligibility of minorities in the workplace and introduced racial quotas. By having these quotas, it created more diversity and brought increased wealth to the African American communities. 

(civilrightsmovement.blogs)

In 1978, Allan Bakke, a white man, filed a lawsuit against the University of California at Davis because of racial quotas. Not only had Bakke applied multiple times, but he had excellent credentials-better than the racial minority students at the school.  He claimed that these racial quotas resulted in him experiencing ‘reverse discrimination.’

(faculty.polytechnic.org)

University of California at Davis had reserved 16% of their admissions for minority students. Because Bakke was denied because of his race, he used the civil rights act of 1964 and the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment to support his case.

The Supreme court sided with Bakke that the quotas were discrimination, but also added that race could be a factor in admissions. This decreased the effectiveness of affirmative action because without quotas, not all businesses would have diversity since some of the minority applicants might not have the same credentials as the other employees, but bringing diversity into the workplace or school is important and the more diversity is implemented the farther down the line will success go. In addition, it would help people to bring financial resources into their minority community. 

During the mock trial, something I noticed from the side representing the Board was that Bakke may have not gotten in for other factors. For example, he was 25, and had gotten rejected from every other school he applied to. This is especially important because he was applying to medical school, which is already extremely competitive and he may just not have had the credentials to make it to the school. This is an interesting argument because it brings up the question of the validity of Bakke’s “reverse racism.”

(wix.com)

In this case, not only was the effectiveness of affirmative action weakened, but race ended up becoming a factor in the admissions process. This is still true today, but diversity was still lessened at the time of the case because without affirmative action, business and schools were still discriminating. 

https://www.britannica.com/event/Bakke-decision

https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_regents.html

http://landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/27/Regents-Univ-Cal-v-Bakke

http://faculty.polytechnic.org/gfeldmeth/1363a.html

https://bpettewa.wixsite.com/homepage/single-post/2016/11/25/bakke-v-board-of-regents-significance

https://civilrightsmovement.blogs.wm.edu/2015/02/18/allan-bakke-the-applicant/

 

The Little Rock Nine

 After Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the “separate but equal” ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson was overturned, and public schools were forced to integrate. However, the court ruled that it only applied to schools, so Jim Crow laws still ran rampant not only in the south, but all over the nation.

The first school to ever integreare high school students was Central high school in Little Rock, Arkansas. It was opposed by the community but the NAACP selected Minnijean Brown, Elizabeth Eckford, Ernest Green, Thelma Mothershed, Melba Patillo, Gloria Ray, Terrence Roberts, Jefferson Thomas and Carlotta Walls, to attend the school. They were later dubbed the 'Little Rock Nine' because of their bravery.

(womenshistory.org)

On the first day, the state governor, Orval Faubus, planned to call the Arkansas national guard to stop the students from entering the school in order to ‘protect’ the white students. In addition, the Mother’s League, a local anti-integration group, protested at the school. The community was adamant about keeping the school segregated, but federal judge Ronald Davies refused to halt the integration process and ordered for it to continue as planned, despite the extreme opposition and potential violence that could occur on the first day of school for the integrating students. 

The Arkansas national guard still showed up, blocking the students  from entering. The integrating students were yelled at by parents and students and were unable to enter the school. Robert Davies and President Eisenhower pushed back against governor Faubus, and Davies ordered the state national guard to leave and the little rock police to take their place to protect the students rather than hindering them from entering. 

(thegaurdian.com)

On September 25, 1957, the students successfully entered the school solely due to the protection of the guards sent by Eisenhower. They were faced with violent threats, hate speech, and a discriminatory environment in the actual school. Although escorting safely, over the course of the school year they endured physical and verbal violence from fellow students. Acid was poured on them, they received injury from being pushed down the stairs, their clothes were urinated on, and they were not allowed to participate in any  extracurriculars.

The governor of Arkansas continued to pursue implementing legal action against integration in the schools and the Little Rock Nine completed their education at other schools after enduring such an extreme level of trauma. 

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/central-high-school-integration

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Little-Rock-Nine

https://www.womenshistory.org/resources/general/little-rock-nine

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/24/little-rock-arkansas-school-segregation-racism

Brown v. Board of Education

 In 1896, the case Plessy v. Furguson declared segregation ‘separate but equal.’ This also legalized Jim Crow laws, which were facilities segregated based on race. 

55 years later in Topeka, Kansas, Linda Brown, a third-grader, was living in the post-Plessy v Ferguson era, meaning she was legally required to go to a black-only school. However, the school was far away and she had to walk a dangerous route every morning just to make it to the bus. Meanwhile, the white school was only six blocks away. 

(usatoday.com)

The NAACP, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, encouraged the Brown family to file a lawsuit against the school district. Thurgood Marshall, later to become an associate justice on the supreme court, argued the case based on the fact that the schools were separated purely by race. Although unusual, both schools had similar facilities and good teachers. They were separate and equal, but he argued that it fostered feelings of inferiority and racism. 

(smithsonianmag.com)

He used the 14th amendment to support his argument, the same one that Homer Plessy in Plessy v. Ferguson used.  The first section of the fourteenth amendment states: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws'' (constitutioncenter.org).

Marshall, on behalf of the NAACP, argued that segregation based on race was unconstitutional. The court agreed with Brown’s side of the case, that ‘separate but equal’ did indeed violate the fourteenth amendment. In the words of Chief Justice Earl Warren: We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of "separate but equal" has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” (supreme.justia.com)

(gse.harvard.edu)

By overturning Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. The Board of Education began a new era of progress for African Americans. However, it did only apply to schools, so Jim Crow laws were still in place. In the coming years, this progress picked up, beginning with the civil rights act of 1964.

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-xiv

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/347/483/

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/postwarera/civil-rights-movement/a/brown-v-board-of-education?utm_account=Grant&utm_campaignname=DSA_www_US_zipcodes&gclid=CjwKCAiAksyNBhAPEiwAlDBeLEcbb3YEK9t34oBEjHFSdyBXriSYyp5QcoCzIp2_3QGUto34woPf8RoCXpAQAvD_BwE

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/brown-v-board-of-education-of-topeka

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/03/26/linda-brown-brown-v-board-education-dies-child-ushered-age-desegregation/460716002/

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-thurgood-marshall-paved-road-brown-v-board-education-180977197/

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/ed/14/06/brown-60-milliken-40

Plessy v. Ferguson

 Louisiana's Separate Train Car Act of 1890 prohibited African Americans from having access to the same train cars as white people. In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, Homer Plessy, a white-passing Louisianan, challenged the separate car act by sitting in a ‘white’ seat. He refused to leave the white train car and was arrested. 

(blackthen.com)

 

This case was taken to the supreme court after the district court judge, Judge John H. Ferguson, rejected Plessy's disagreement with the Separate Train Car Act as unconstitutional. The state supreme court affirmed this decision and the case proceeded to make its way to the supreme court. Plessy argued that it violated the equal rights granted to him by the fourteenth amendment. 

The famous “separate but equal” ruling of the case came from the decision that the fourteenth amendment only applied to political rights, not social rights (Jim Crow Laws) and that because train cars were available for both white people and African Americans, there was no inferiority imposed on the African Americans as they were both given the same facilities. 

(timetoast.com)

Justice Henry Brown concluded: “We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff's argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the two races stamps the colored race with a badge of inferiority. If this is so, it is not because of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it.” (law.cornell.edu)

There was only one dissenting opinion: John Marshall Harlin. He argued that the train car act not only implied but allowed for African-Americans to be portrayed as inferior. “But in view of the constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.” (law.cornell.edu) Harlin’s perspective was progressive for his time because he used the constitution as intended, not just to perpetuate discrimination.

Throughout the history of the United States, from Jamestown to the present, legislation has allowed for loopholes that allow discrimination. Plessy v. Ferguson, is, sadly, another example of this. 

(cnn.com)

As we look back on this case from a modern perspective, it is appalling looking back on the court's decision. However, the role of the supreme court, as intended by the founding fathers, is to preserve the intentions of the constitution. In this era, they were preserving the intentions of the constitution- which discriminated against African Americans since the founding of the country. 

The fourteenth amendment states: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (constitution center.org) According to the majority of the supreme court, the Louisiana Separate Train Car Act did not violate the 14th amendment because he was not denied equal rights- he was given equal facilities. This is the exact loophole that courts used over and over again until the civil rights act to let Jim Crow Laws go ignored. The majority claimed that African Americans were making it seem like discrimination, but they should be grateful for what they have. This is the type of treatment that is appalling to us today because we are more aware that civil rights are granted, natural rights, not something that hangs in the balance of the law.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Plessy-v-Ferguson-1896/Majority-opinion

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/plessy-v-ferguson

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/plessy-v-ferguson-aimed-to-end-segregation-but-codified-it-instead

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/163/537

https://blackthen.com/june-7-1892-homer-plessy-arrested-refusing-leave-whites-seat/

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/12/us/homer-plessy-pardon/index.html

https://www.timetoast.com/timelines/unit-2-key-terms-d8bb77ad-fde8-424d-a32e-7af0a1f3d16e