The Civil Rights Act – 50 Years Later
President Johnson and Dr. King
Many died. Millions suffered.
On July 2, 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed a Civil Rights Act outlawing discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. America expected great change. Fifty years later, there is a difference. But, some things may never change.
The 1960s in America were tumultuous times. President Johnson rose to office, following the November 1963 murder of President John F. Kennedy. That year marked brutality across the South. Voting rights activist Medgar Evers killed in Mississippi. Four little Black girls killed in an Alabama church bombing.
Under President Johnson, Congress used its power under the Commerce clause of the Constitution to end segregation in private businesses. If a business affected interstate commerce then it was covered by the Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled even a small country restaurant was subject to the Act because its meat was from out of State. Ollie’s Bar-B-Q could no longer force Blacks to eat outdoors.
Women gained a great deal from the Civil Rights Act, too. Initially, gender was not in the proposed law. Protecting against sex discrimination was so controversial that conservatives added the sex provision in hopes of killing the entire Act. However, the bill passed anyway, giving feminist a weapon against sex discrimination.
For women, Title IX of the Civil Rights Act required recipients of Federal money to provide equal opportunity. High school and college sports programs were forced to provide women with scholarships, training, and access to facilities. With those opportunities, and affirmative action, women propelled themselves forward.
Immigrants, LGBT, seniors, and the disabled benefitted from the Civil Rights Act of 1964, directly or indirectly. The Act, combined with hundreds of racial justice cases fought in the U.S. Supreme Court, provided a foundation for expanding their Equal Protection rights under the 14th Amendment and relevant Federal legislation.
President Johnson, a Southerner, might not have envisioned that within 50 years of his 1964 Civil Rights Act there would be a two-term African-American President. Born to poor farmers in Texas, President Johnson may not have known African-Americans would ascend to power in business, arts, science, sports, and education.
Now, technology is a brave new world in need of more African-American pioneers. While the criminal justice system stands as a testament to continued racial disparities. Federal laws cannot change hearts intent on racial prejudice. However, the Civil Rights Act created legal consequences for certain prejudices.
Prior to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, racial discrimination took place with impunity. This Act subjects those who choose to discriminate to money damages, if proven. Because of the Civil Rights Act, people of color, women, immigrants, and those of all religious faiths can fight prejudice in court.
There are concerns the Supreme Court will restrict protections within an already weakened Civil Rights Act. A conservative faction of the Court question race-based Federal protections created during the 1960s. Last year, the Court limited provisions of the Voting Rights Act, in the case of Shelby County, AL v. Holder.
However, in 2013, Texans filed 9,068 charges of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the largest of any State. Prejudice may be a fact of life. But, for anyone facing discrimination, President Johnson’s Civil Rights Act, which rose from a gloomy past 50 years ago, remains a bright star of hope.
Gloria J. Browne-Marshall, an Associate Professor of Constitutional Law at John Jay College (CUNY), is a legal correspondent covering the U.S. Supreme Court, the United Nations, and major legal issues. Her book “Race, Law, and American Society: 1607 to Present” (Routledge) covers U.S. Supreme Court decisions involving race and education, criminal justice, voting rights, civil liberties, property ownership, and internationalism. Twitter: @GBrowneMarshall
Ann GarrisonNovember 30,2013 @ 12:14 PM
It was sexy to be against the war back then. He was probably in it to get laid.
carpinteyrobwmJuly 14,2013 @ 09:29 PM
carpinteyrobwmJuly 14,2013 @ 08:34 PM
amslctciikJuly 13,2013 @ 01:47 AM
http://youngsgear.us - louis vuitton bags cheap on the inside...