Jim Crow 2.0: Black voters face new restrictions upheld by Supreme Court - The Washington Post
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
When northern newspapers complained about Mississippi's new state constitution in 1890, charging that new anti-fraud voting restrictions were meant to disenfranchise Black voters, a White state senator defended it, saying, "I deny that the educational test was intended to exclude Negroes from voting … That more Negroes would be excluded is true … but that is not our fault."
By 1903, as the "Mississippi Plan" spread throughout the South, Mississippi Gov. James Vardaman was less discreet about it. "There is no use to equivocate or lie about the matter," he said. "Mississippi's constitutional convention of 1890 was held for no other purpose than to eliminate the n----- from politics."
More than a century later, the Supreme Court has upheld new voting restrictions in Arizona, after a lower court said the restrictions discriminated against minority voters. In a 6-to-3 opinion critics say is reminiscent of the Jim Crow era,Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. acknowledged that these restrictions could have a disproportionate effect on 0.5 percent of Black, Latino and Native American voters. Though Joe Biden beat President Donald Trump by 0.4 percentage point in Arizona and 0.3 points in Georgia, Alito argued that 0.5 percent of voters was too "small in absolute terms" to outweigh the state's interests in protecting the vote from fraud.
He fought for Black voting rights after the Civil War. He was almost killed for it.
The decision Thursday paves the way for other states that are considering — or have already passed — new voting restrictions in the wake of Trump's false claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election. The rush of new laws have earned the moniker "Jim Crow 2.0" from voting rights activists.
But what about Jim Crow 1.0? How did white supremacist lawmakers get around the 15th Amendment, which guaranteed Black men the right to vote, and later, the 19th Amendment, which should have secured the vote for Black women? Here's a look at their legal and illegal methods.
Poll taxes
Nearly every Southern state instituted poll taxes during the Jim Crow era. In most states, the tax was "just" one or two dollars (the equivalent of about $30 to $60 today) — an amount easy enough for middle- and upper-class voters to pay, but much harder for the poor, then and now. The tax disproportionately excluded Black voters. Plus, a lot of these laws required the tax be paid well before voting day and to produce multiple receipts, extra steps that made voting even harder.
That was the case in Ocoee, Fla., in 1920, where a local White judge held training sessions for potential Black voters on how to pay the poll tax beforehand and prove it on Election Day.
Poll taxes were banned in 1964 at the federal level by the 24th Amendment, and at the state level by the Supreme Court in 1966.
Literacy tests
Laws requiring literacy tests were an even bigger challenge to overcome. Again, they disproportionately affected Black voters, many of whom were denied education while they were enslaved. And even if they could read, the laws were still rigged against them. In Mississippi, the county clerk would demand a passage to be read from the state constitution and then decide if the prospective voter passed. For Black voters, they would read dense, difficult sections; for White voters, easier ones.
That's what happened to Fannie Lou Hamer in 1962, when she attempted to register to vote in Indianola, Miss. Hamer, 44 at the time, had only recently learned from organizers for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee that Black people were even eligible to vote. The first two times she took the literacy test, she failed, prompting her to tell the clerk, "You'll see me every 30 days till I pass."
Civil rights crusader Fannie Lou Hamer defied men — and presidents — who tried to silence her
'Grandfather' clauses
Lawmakers argued that since poll taxes and literacy tests could also prevent White people from registering to vote, the laws were not racist. But by adding "grandfather" clauses, exempting anyone whose grandfather could vote from taxes and tests, poor or illiterate Whites had a way around the law.
The Supreme Court unanimously (with one abstention) struck down grandfather clauses in 1915, after Oklahoma officials who enforced it were prosecuted in federal court. Chief Justice Edward Douglass White said the clauses were "repugnant to the prohibitions of the 15th Amendment."
Whites-only primaries
Because political parties were not government entities, their primaries did not have to abide by the 14th (equal protection) or 15th amendments, so in many counties and states, Southern Democrats held Whites-only primaries. Since White voters were overwhelmingly Southern Democrats, whoever won the primary was all but guaranteed to win the election.
A federal court struck down Whites-only primaries in Georgia, spurring Maceo Snipes, a Black man who had just returned from fighting in World War II, to cast a ballot in a Democratic primary on July 17, 1946. He was the only Black person in Taylor County, Ga., to do so.
That's where the last method comes in.
Intimidation and violence
If White supremacists' legal moves failed, there was always violence, and the threat of it, to keep Black voters from exercising their rights.
After the federal court decision in 1946, White politicians in Georgia had warned "wise Negroes will stay away from White folks' ballot boxes." Within days of Snipes voting in the primary, he was shot on his front porch by a White man. At the hospital, he was denied medical care because of his race and died of his injuries. The man who admitted to shooting him was acquitted.
And even though the county clerk said Hamer failed her literacy test, just her attempt to register in Mississippi in 1962 led to frightening retaliation. She was harassed by police on her way home, where her husband was fired from his job and she had to flee for her life. Someone fired 16 bullets into the house where she was staying; fortunately, no one was hurt.
Hamer persisted and passed her literacy test on the third attempt. Then she was told she still couldn't vote until she could provide two poll tax receipts.
And in Ocoee in 1920, when Black men and women showed up to vote with their poll tax receipts, White residents retaliated, burning down Black homes and churches and chasing Black families out of town. One of the voters, July Perry, was lynched, and his mutilated body was strung up in front of the home of the White judge who had trained him.
Nowadays, these "Jim Crow 1.0" methods have all been struck down or banned. And for decades, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prevented many local officials from imposing any other voting restrictions without first getting "pre-clearance" from the Justice Department. But the Supreme Court struck down the pre-clearance provision in 2013, arguing that it had worked so well it was no longer necessary. Thursday's decision by the Supreme Court further weakens the Voting Rights Act.
Read more Retropolis:
The 'Mississippi Plan' to keep Blacks from voting in 1890: 'We came here to exclude the Negro'
A Black WWII veteran voted in Georgia in 1946. He was lynched for it.
White supremacists attacked Johnny Cash for marrying a 'Negro' woman. But was his first wife Black?
A White mob unleashed the worst Election Day violence in U.S. history in Florida a century ago
Tags
Who is online
416 visitors
If voter fraud is not what really motivates the gop to keep enacting more and more restrictions on voting,
WHAT REALLY DOES MOTIVATE THOSE BUZZARDS?
None of these common sense revisions to voting rules is in any way restrictions on voting, to blacks or anyone else.
If they were, you would list them.
Since republicans have continually failed to show any voter fraud, to any significant degree, what are all these new laws for?
Not to mention that, the extremely few voter fraud crimes to have been found, are predominately republican.
I like the section of the Georgia law that forbids distribution of drinking water to the people waiting in line to vote.
That's obviously going to reduce fraud...
You are completely free to donate all the drinking water you want, just give it to the poll workers to distribute for you.
People in line are allowed to drink it.
They are petrified of being voted out of office and having to go home to face the people they have screwed over. No more expense accounts, no more fake adoration, and no more power.
RepublicansAmerican Fascists intend to eliminate democracy and rule of law in this country.Duh.
It was a rhetorical question. Racism motivates it!
I'm not sure which comes first: racism or authoritarianism. They feed on each other in an infernal spiral.
Now the Republicans are seeing the benefits of having stacked the SCOTUS. I'm sure Xi Jinping is applauding the Republican success with voter suppression.
RepublicansAmerican Fascists have shown themselves totally incompetent for running the country.... but they don't really care about the country. They want the end of democracy in America, end of story. That's pretty shallow thinking, since China looms, but hey! No one ever accused theRepublicansAmerican Fascists of deep thought.Where DO you get this crap from?
From NT Fascists.
[Deleted]
The remainder of the comments were removed for off topic, meta, no value etc
[removed]
I doubt sincerely that you can even name one person here who is a fascist, but it is always amusing to see people label people they don't know.
Of course you do. We know how sincere you are....
As for naming NT Fascists... that would be a CoC violation. But don't worry. They identify themselves: racist and authoritarian.
Well, great, we agree! Thanks!
I like reading your hilarious comments! They are a real hoot!
And why let the CofC stop you?
No voter suppression.
Left wing myth.
They've just created an imaginary world that bears no relationship to reality. They redefine words to mean whatever they think will create a positive emotional response in their favor. The whole progressive movement is premised on keeping their supporters in a constant state of hysteria. Fascists under every pillow, Russian conspiracies , thousands of innocent blacks annually being slaughtered by police, voter suppression... the list goes on.
Simple to stump a progressive liberal--ask how the laws suppress anyone and watch the crickets!
I'm not a myth, I'm a mythter. Reminds of a joke about a doctor examining a well-developed girl. As he put the stethascope on her heart he said "Big breaths", and she replied "Yeth, thank you."
Thankfully, there is no voter suppression in China
Means nothing to me - I can still vote in my own country and there's no voter suppression there.
As long as you are okay, right? Who cares who else has no rights..
Everyone I know here is okay, and they all have all the rights they need and want. What's important to you just might not be important to people who live in a different culture. Just because you consider it important that the whole world has to be just like America, there are many who don't consider that to be a panacea - I certainly don't.
What's Chinese health-care like, Buzz? Many Americans still do not think that health-care should be an inalienable right. What's the situation in China?
Lol....If that were true, the CCP wouldn't be engaging in rampant censorship and propaganda. Of course, thousands who wanted silly things like the right to express their opinions were gunned down and had their remains power washed into the sewers around Tiananmen Square. But you didn't know them, so who cares, right?
Your defense to genocide and other human rights abuses in China is always "it doesn't affect me or the people I like here, so I don't care." It speaks volumes.
I guess you don't know any Uyghurs
In some respects the health care in China is better than in Canada, save that in Canada it is free. I have had successes here with both western and traditional medicine here, and there is no wait time to be examined using the most sophisticated medical devices, such as MRI, etc. with the most modern equipment. Painless dentistry as well. When I had to have some teeth pulled, I wondered why it was taking so long to do the thing, and I was told it had already been done.
As I've said, most likely every nation has history they are not proud of, and that includes yours, but I'm not back then, I'm now. You want to keep bringing up the past, go ahead, but then maybe match it with America's past. Have you been affected by the daily mass shootings where you are, or maybe you should be doing something about it, eh?
"I guess you don't know any Uyghurs."
How would I know if I did or not? I've never been to Xinjiang. There are around 11 million Uyghurs in China and they don't all live there - they live all through China. I may have taught them, met them, but they don't wear their ancestral dress in the many places I've been and they don't write "Uyghur" on their foreheads. So there are 11 million Uyghurs and maybe 10% of them are in reeducation camps. I've watched interviews with Uyghurs, professionals, educators, farmers, workers, etc who are not in reeducation camps, so why is it only a percentage are there? Do you not think there may be a reason for that?
How are costs managed?
Who pays for what?
Expat insurance is available, but I was too old to qualify, so I pay cash. However the costs are a pittance compared to non-insured American health costs. An example is laser eye surgery costs the equivalent of US$100. How much would it cost in the USA? A wave impact machine procedure to dissolve a kidney stone, including all follow up anti-infection injections costs US$100. I accidently chopped a bit off my toe while nail-cutting, and had to have the wound cleaned, medicated and dressed a few times at the small clinic next door and it cost me 10 yuan each time (i.e US$1.70).So either people have medical insurance or it's pay as you go.
Is insurance mandatory for Chinese nationals?
I don't think so. By the way, I think I was misled about the cost of laser eye surgery here, the least expensive process is actually around the equivalent of around US$500, whereas the minimum cost in the USA is a little over $2,000, i.e. four times as much. What I cannot believe is the cost in the USA of Lithotripsy (shock wave kidney stone pulverization). I've had it twice here, worked perfectly, and it only cost the equivalent of US$100 including anti-infection follow-up, whereas I just saw that it cost anywhere from about $6,000 to $10,000 in the USA. UNBELIEVABLE. Pretty well everything costs a lot less here, which is why I can live fairly comfortably on a Canada government pension.
What worries Democrats is that the huge voter turnout wasn't helpful down ballot. The Democratic Party has always manipulated voting laws when the electorate turns away from the Democratic Party. That's why Democrats imposed Jim Crow laws.
Having to vote in your own precinct is not Jim Crow. Polling stations closed on Sunday is not Jim Crow. Restrictions on electioneering at polling stations is not Jim Crow.
The Black voting block was pretty reliably Republican until the 1960s. Why would the Republican Party impose Jim Crow laws that would hurt their voter turnout?
Yeah, as if the last sixty years never happened.
Ahhh.. Progressive liberal Democrats like to pretend it wasn't the Democratic Party responsible for Jim Crow, and thus want to portray the GOP as what they themselves were.
[removed]
The Democratic party is indeed responsible for that shit, and good on them for trying to right past wrongs.
The 1960s and the 60 years since did happen by the way.
removed for context by charger
Damn!!! I really thought I would never see the day a progressive liberal actually admitted it!
Good on you!!!!!!!
Over the last sixty years Democrats have created a new racial stereotype of 'disadvantaged Black'. Democrats have used civil rights to make the 'disadvantaged Black' wards of the state.
Are we supposed to believe that cities controlled by Democrats have become havens for white supremacists? Police departments in cities controlled by Democrats have been overrun by racists? Chicago, New York, Baltimore, Atlanta, San Antonio, Minneapolis, Seattle, Los Angeles, and San Francisco are threatened by white fascists in spite of the government being controlled by Democrats?
If Democrats are so powerless when in charge of local, state, and Federal government then what's the point of putting Democrats in charge?
That has been my point all along. Democrats--when in the minority--claim to be incapable of preventing the GOP from doing anything, and when Democrats are in the majority, cry about the evil GOP blocking them from passing what they want to. Can't lead when in the majority or minority, so why keep electing those clowns?
[removed]
Very true facts which the left chooses to ignore.
I assume America doesn't have the same law as Canada that I remember from when I was a teenager working in my father's factory about 70 years ago, that employees are legally entitiled to take off four hours from a working day without being penalized in order to vote at a municipal, provincial or federal election. In the USA I would assume it is usually the less privileged and poorer Americans who might have to work long hours through a 6 day week in order to make ends meet. IMO blocking Sunday voting is a method to prevent those kinds of people from voting, and I'll bet you wouldn't find many Republicans among them. So in my opinion, polling stations closed on Sunday DAMN WELL IS JIM CROW.
That is your opinion, as stated, but it doesn't make it right.
Yes, it may be my opinion, and it may be the opinion of many others, and you are just as entitiled to have your opinion as well.
This isn't rocket science.
If you want voting to be easy, you open polling stations on Sunday, when people have time.
If you do not want voting to be easy, you open polling stations at times that are inconvenient.
Duh.
Any time a polling station is closed it is inconvenient for someone. Oh well.
Your capacity for understanding is... stunning...
And the capacity some have of calling things suppressive is rather amazing, too!
It’s exceedingly racist to believe blacks can’t show up to the right polling station.
Recall the testimony of the Obama DOJ retained expert in the North Carolina voting case a few years ago:
also the case that — well, yes, so it would, empirically more likely affect African Americans. Also, understanding within political science, that people who register to vote the closer and closer one gets to Election Day tend to be less sophisticated voters, tend to be less educated voters, tend to be voters who are less attuned to public affairs.That also tells me from the literature of political science that there are likely to be people who will end up not registering and not voting. People who correspond to those factors tend to be African American
I wouldn't say it is racist necessarily. Unless you are arguing that they suck at voting BECAUSE they are black.