The Eisenhower Era

<h1>Text Preview</h1> <p> <P>Dwight D. Eisenhower replaced Truman as president in 1953. Americans were ready to turn their attention from the war-ravaged years of the 1940s and early 1950s to domestic concerns, ushering in the era of civil rights reform. The philosophy of the Eisenhower administration was labeled by many as "dynamic conservatism" and appealed to both Republicans and Democrats. "In all those things which deal with people, be liberal, be human," explained Eisenhower. "But when dealing with people's money, or their economy, or their form of government, be conservative."</P> </p> <p> <P>As more black Americans entered the workplace and moved into white communities, desegregation became a prominent issue. When Eisenhower took office, he announced his commitment to the principle of civil rights; however, he only acted on the federal level. During his first term, public services in Washington D.C., navy yards, and veterans' hospitals were desegregated. However, on civil rights issues that affected the majority of the black population in America, he deferred to local and state authorities.</P> </p> <p> <P>Eisenhower soon found himself at the heart of the civil rights struggle when segregationists reacted to a Supreme Court decision declaring that "separate but equal" public schools denied black children equal treatment under the Constitution. In 1896, the Supreme Court had upheld state racial segregation laws based on the "separate but equal" doctrine in <i>Plessy v. Ferguson. </i>The Court ruled that making a legal distinction between races did not violate the Thirteenth Amendment forbidding involuntary servitude. In addition, the Court did not feel that <i>Plessy</i> violated the spirit of the Fourteenth Amendment, since no rights were denied to black citizens. Laws requiring the separation of races, the Court declared, do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race.</P> </p> <p> <P>During the next five decades, blacks and whites went to separate schools, ate at separate restaurants, rode on separate buses, and drank from separate water fountains. Although the legality of segregation was based on a separate but equal doctrine, the actual facilities provided to blacks were rarely of the same quality as those provided for whites. In the 1930s, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) began to challenge the "separate but equal" doctrine in the courts. Early victories for the NAACP included court rulings that insisted that facilities, primarily black schools, be upgraded to be comparable to white schools.<br></P> <P>As court rulings like <i>Sweatt v. Painter</i> began to challenge school segregation, much of the American public, particularly residents of southern states, remained opposed to allowing black students into white schools. Feelings among blacks that they remained "second-class citizens" created frustration and disillusionment within the black population.</P> </p> <p> <P>In 1953, Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren to the Supreme Court, and he served as chief justice until 1969. Warren hoped to make the issue of race and civil rights a referendum for the Court. He immediately began persuading other justices that the Court should take a leading role in civil rights reform. Soon after Warren took the bench, an NAACP-sponsored case came before the Court. <i><b>Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka</b></i><b> (1954)</b> provided a means for the Court to take a stand on civil rights.</P> </p> <p> <P><i>Brown</i> was a combination of four other school segregation cases from the South that involved more serious problems, including inferior segregated schools and a lack of school transportation for blacks. Kansas resident Linda Brown was attached to the case on the insistence of southern justices who felt it was necessary to divert the pressure of the case from the South. Topeka was viewed as a northern city, thus it was used as the title for the combination of cases. The Topeka Board of Education had denied Brown admittance to an all-white school. Her father filed suit against the Topeka Board of Education, hoping to force the issue of segregation in schools. <br></P> <P>Thurgood Marshall, the NAACP's legal director, argued before the Court on behalf of Brown. Marshall argued that a "separate but equal" philosophy violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Even if facilities were equal in quality, Marshall argued, the mere presence of segregation made equal education impossible and caused irrevocable harm to both black and white children.</P> </p> <p> <P>In the unanimous decision, the Court rejected the Plessy doctrine of separate but equal. Writing for the Court, Warren declared that "separate educational facilities" were "inherently unequal" because the intangible inequalities of separation deprived black students of equal protection under the law. One year later, after further discussion among the justices, they ruled that the integration of schools must go forward "with all deliberate speed."</P> </p> <p> <P>Segregationists reacted to the Court's ruling with disgust and an open call for opposition, organizing "massive resistance" to the idea of school integration. President Eisenhower, shocked by the Court's ruling, said that the ruling must be obeyed but did little to halt the growing protests in the South. State legislatures in the South passed more than 450 laws and resolutions aimed at preventing the enforcement of the <i>Brown</i> decision. Many states diverted public money to establish private white-only schools where the Court's order could not be implemented as easily. In 1956, the Virginia state legislature cut funds for integrated schools in an effort to stall the growing movement. Critics decried the judicial activism of the Warren Court, but proponents pointed to the necessity to uphold the constitutional rights that Congress had failed to enforce.<br></P> <P>The resistance measures were effective. Only 700 of 10,000 school districts in the South had desegregated, or were in the process of desegregation, by the end of 1956. Southern protests, coupled with a divided American public, set the stage for a battle that would rage in courtrooms, in schools, and on the streets during the 1960's. </P> </p> <p> <P>The <b>Civil Rights Act of 1957</b> was created to enforce African-American voting rights in the South and put measures in place to prevent mob violence in school desegregation disputes. It was the first civil rights legislation in the 90 years since the Civil War. The bill made it illegal to try to prevent a person from voting in a federal election. It also created the Civil Rights Division within the Department of Justice and the Civil Rights Commission to investigate racial discrimination, especially concerning voting. When the bill was presented to the Senate, a southern filibuster kept the chamber in session around the clock for over a week. Senator J. Strom Thurmond from South Carolina spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes and set the record for the longest speech during a filibuster. The filibuster failed and the bill passed. Although compromises that weakened the bill were made for the southern senators, the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 opened the door to later legislation that was effective in ending <i><b>de jure segregation</b></i>, or segregation required by law.</P> </p> <p> <P>The <b>Civil Rights Act of 1960</b> was passed to help stop violence in the south against potential black voters. It authorized the U.S. Attorney General and the Justice department to appoint referees to investigate allegations of voting fraud and obstruct persons from voting. The act introduced penalties to be levied against anybody who obstructed someone's attempt to register to vote or someone's attempt to actually vote. The act was not enforced and primarily served as a stepping stone for future civil rights legislation.</P> </p> <p id="TextCopyright">Copyright 2006 The Regents of the University of California and Monterey Institute for Technology and Education</p>