Jim Crow

STRAUDER V. WEST VIRGINIA*

Facts: Black man convicted of murdering his wife by all white jury. Law disqualified black people from jury service. 

Result/Holding: D had the right to move the case to fed courts. 14th Amendment Due Process clause phrased in 2 different ways (with diff consequences)

1. Laws need to be exactly the same for white and black people

2. Unfriendly legislation about race was not allowed

Reasoning: Serving on jury is seen as a political right but 14th only protects civil rights → argued from the perspective of D’s civil rights to due process, not the right of black people to be on juries. Very clever.

PLESSY V FERGUSON*

Facts: Law that says railway companies will provide separate but equal accommodations for white and black passengers, which will be divided. P, refused to give up his seat in the white car was removed by police. 

Holding: Separate but equal = constitutional (later overturned)

Reasoning: Point of 14th amendment is equal treatment of races by the law, not to enforce social equality

SMITH V ALLWRIGHT

Holding: Banned racial discrimination by political parties → parties exercising power given to them by the state.

TERRY V ADAMS

Holding: Closed loophole where all-white private club would select candidates who would then always win the political primary. Acting like a political party → cannot racially discriminate.

SWEATT V PAINTER

Facts: Heman Sweatt applied to Texas Law. Denied because he was black. Texas opened up an all-black law school (separate but equal)

Result/Holding: Sweatt must be allowed at Texas Law. The intangible opportunities at the all-black law school were not substantially equal (alumni, resources, prestige, etc.)