CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
12,811
edits
Civil Rights Act of 1968: Difference between revisions
m
Text replacement - "Los Angeles Times" to "Los Angeles Times"
m (Text replacement - "{{Lyndon B. Johnson}}" to "") |
m (Text replacement - "Los Angeles Times" to "Los Angeles Times") |
||
| Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
The [[Civil Rights Movement]] (1954–1968), beginning after the ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]] case,'' paved the way for the passage of a few civil rights bills. The [[Civil Rights Act of 1957]] created the [[United States Commission on Civil Rights]] and the [[United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division]]. The [[Civil Rights Act of 1960]] enacted federal legislation of local registration polls and if anyone obstructed someone's right to vote, there were severe penalties. It also extended the Civil Rights Commission, so it could oversee registration and voting practices. The [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]] outlawed discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation, and employment discrimination were also prohibited. The [[Voting Rights Act of 1965]], similar to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibited racial discrimination in voting. The Act was later expanded to help protect the right to vote for racial minorities throughout the country (mainly the South). | The [[Civil Rights Movement]] (1954–1968), beginning after the ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]] case,'' paved the way for the passage of a few civil rights bills. The [[Civil Rights Act of 1957]] created the [[United States Commission on Civil Rights]] and the [[United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division]]. The [[Civil Rights Act of 1960]] enacted federal legislation of local registration polls and if anyone obstructed someone's right to vote, there were severe penalties. It also extended the Civil Rights Commission, so it could oversee registration and voting practices. The [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]] outlawed discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation, and employment discrimination were also prohibited. The [[Voting Rights Act of 1965]], similar to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibited racial discrimination in voting. The Act was later expanded to help protect the right to vote for racial minorities throughout the country (mainly the South). | ||
Another impetus for the law's passage came from the 1966 [[Chicago Freedom Movement|Chicago Open Housing Movement]], led by [[Martin Luther King Jr.]], [[James Bevel]], and [[Al Raby]]. Also influential was the 1963 [[California Proposition 14 (1964)|Rumford Fair Housing Act]] in California, which had been backed by the [[National Association for the Advancement of Colored People|NAACP]] and [[Congress of Racial Equality|CORE]].<ref name="wiu.edu">{{Cite web |url=http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/MilesWIHRSp09.pdf |title=Darren Miles "Everett Dirksen's Role in Civil Rights Legislation" Western Illinois Historical Review, Vol. I Spring 2009 |access-date=December 23, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141223193406/http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/MilesWIHRSp09.pdf |archive-date=December 23, 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://landlords.about.com/od/Landlord101/a/What-Is-Fair-Housing.htm |title=Erin Eberlin "What is Fair Housing?" About.com |access-date=December 18, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141218022805/http://landlords.about.com/od/Landlord101/a/What-Is-Fair-Housing.htm |archive-date=December 18, 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref> and the 1967 Milwaukee fair housing campaigns led by [[James Groppi]] and the [[NAACP Youth Council]].<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-11-05-mn-4337-story.html |title=Burt Folkart "James Groppi, Ex-Priest, Civil Rights Activist, Dies" The Los Angeles Times, November 05, 1985{{!}}B |website= | Another impetus for the law's passage came from the 1966 [[Chicago Freedom Movement|Chicago Open Housing Movement]], led by [[Martin Luther King Jr.]], [[James Bevel]], and [[Al Raby]]. Also influential was the 1963 [[California Proposition 14 (1964)|Rumford Fair Housing Act]] in California, which had been backed by the [[National Association for the Advancement of Colored People|NAACP]] and [[Congress of Racial Equality|CORE]].<ref name="wiu.edu">{{Cite web |url=http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/MilesWIHRSp09.pdf |title=Darren Miles "Everett Dirksen's Role in Civil Rights Legislation" Western Illinois Historical Review, Vol. I Spring 2009 |access-date=December 23, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141223193406/http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/MilesWIHRSp09.pdf |archive-date=December 23, 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://landlords.about.com/od/Landlord101/a/What-Is-Fair-Housing.htm |title=Erin Eberlin "What is Fair Housing?" About.com |access-date=December 18, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141218022805/http://landlords.about.com/od/Landlord101/a/What-Is-Fair-Housing.htm |archive-date=December 18, 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref> and the 1967 Milwaukee fair housing campaigns led by [[James Groppi]] and the [[NAACP Youth Council]].<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-11-05-mn-4337-story.html |title=Burt Folkart "James Groppi, Ex-Priest, Civil Rights Activist, Dies" The Los Angeles Times, November 05, 1985{{!}}B |website=Los Angeles Times |date=November 5, 1985 |access-date=December 18, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306185701/http://articles.latimes.com/1985-11-05/news/mn-4337_1_roman-catholic-priest |archive-date=March 6, 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref> Senator [[Walter Mondale]] advocated for the bill in Congress, but noted that over successive years, a federal fair housing bill was the most filibustered legislation in US history.<ref name="propublica.org">{{Cite web |url=https://www.propublica.org/article/living-apart-how-the-government-betrayed-a-landmark-civil-rights-law |title=Nikole Hannah-Jones, "Living Apart: How the Government Betrayed a Landmark Civil Rights Law" Propublica, Oct. 28, 2012 |date=June 25, 2015 |access-date=June 30, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170630004110/https://www.propublica.org/article/living-apart-how-the-government-betrayed-a-landmark-civil-rights-law |archive-date=June 30, 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref> It was opposed by most Northern and Southern senators, as well as the [[National Association of Real Estate Boards]].<ref name="wiu.edu">{{Cite web |url=http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/MilesWIHRSp09.pdf |title=Darren Miles "Everett Dirksen's Role in Civil Rights Legislation" Western Illinois Historical Review, Vol. I Spring 2009 |access-date=December 23, 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141223193406/http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/MilesWIHRSp09.pdf |archive-date=December 23, 2014 |url-status=live }}</ref> A proposed "Civil Rights Act of 1966" collapsed completely because of its fair housing provision. Mondale commented: | ||
<blockquote>A lot of [previous] civil rights [legislation] was about making the South behave and taking the teeth from [[George Wallace]]…. This came right to the neighborhoods across the country. This was civil rights getting personal.<ref name="propublica.org"/></blockquote> | <blockquote>A lot of [previous] civil rights [legislation] was about making the South behave and taking the teeth from [[George Wallace]]…. This came right to the neighborhoods across the country. This was civil rights getting personal.<ref name="propublica.org"/></blockquote> | ||
| Line 306: | Line 306: | ||
Although he ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, Judge Davis nevertheless disputed the allegations of discrimination. He said he based his ruling in part on the city's failure to prove that the area had a higher crime rate and lower property values than other parts of the city. The city "did not act in bad faith or fraudulently," Davis wrote. It "did not discriminate against any minority or low or moderate income person and did not violate any person's Due Process, Equal Protection or other Civil Rights."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Kowsky |first1=Kim |title=Redevelopment Proposal Shot Down in Court : Hawthorne: A judge invalidates a plan for construction in the north end, but disagrees with plaintiffs' allegations of discrimination |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-07-10-me-1631-story.html |work=Los Angeles Times |date=10 July 1992 }}</ref> | Although he ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, Judge Davis nevertheless disputed the allegations of discrimination. He said he based his ruling in part on the city's failure to prove that the area had a higher crime rate and lower property values than other parts of the city. The city "did not act in bad faith or fraudulently," Davis wrote. It "did not discriminate against any minority or low or moderate income person and did not violate any person's Due Process, Equal Protection or other Civil Rights."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Kowsky |first1=Kim |title=Redevelopment Proposal Shot Down in Court : Hawthorne: A judge invalidates a plan for construction in the north end, but disagrees with plaintiffs' allegations of discrimination |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-07-10-me-1631-story.html |work=Los Angeles Times |date=10 July 1992 }}</ref> | ||
The Anti-Riot Act of Title I had been rarely used; it notably had been used to prosecute the [[Chicago Seven]], but had not faced strict legal scrutiny. In the late 2010s, with growing concerns over activities of the [[far right]], [[white nationalist]]s, and [[white supremacist]]s, the Anti-Riot Act had been used to prosecute organizers of various rallies that had turned violent, such as the [[Unite the Right rally]] in 2017. However, in June 2019, a federal district court in California, overseeing the case of members of the [[Rise Above Movement]] related to both the Unite the Right rally and other protests in California, ruled that the Anti-Riot Act was unconstitutional in that it was "overbroad in violation of the First Amendment."<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/tn-dpt-me-hb-ram-charges-dropped-20190604-story.html | title = Judge dismisses federal charges against 3 members of H.B.-based white power group | first = Julia | last = Sclafani | date = June 4, 2019 | access-date = June 5, 2019 | work = | The Anti-Riot Act of Title I had been rarely used; it notably had been used to prosecute the [[Chicago Seven]], but had not faced strict legal scrutiny. In the late 2010s, with growing concerns over activities of the [[far right]], [[white nationalist]]s, and [[white supremacist]]s, the Anti-Riot Act had been used to prosecute organizers of various rallies that had turned violent, such as the [[Unite the Right rally]] in 2017. However, in June 2019, a federal district court in California, overseeing the case of members of the [[Rise Above Movement]] related to both the Unite the Right rally and other protests in California, ruled that the Anti-Riot Act was unconstitutional in that it was "overbroad in violation of the First Amendment."<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/tn-dpt-me-hb-ram-charges-dropped-20190604-story.html | title = Judge dismisses federal charges against 3 members of H.B.-based white power group | first = Julia | last = Sclafani | date = June 4, 2019 | access-date = June 5, 2019 | work =Los Angeles Times | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190604233106/https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/tn-dpt-me-hb-ram-charges-dropped-20190604-story.html | archive-date = June 4, 2019 | url-status = live }}</ref> | ||
==Legacy== | ==Legacy== | ||