Incorporating Rights

The Civil Rights Movement

The Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) challenged the constitutionality of segregated schools. In 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson legalized segregation based on the “separate but equal” principle. States across the country created separate, all-Black schools that were often underfunded, of inferior quality, or further from students’ homes. In Brown, future Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, head of the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund, argued that segregation in schools was inherently unequal. The Court agreed in a unanimous decision overturning the Plessy case, stating that “in the field of public education, ‘separate but equal’ has no place.” Though the Brown decision was met with significant opposition, it paved the way for legal challenges to other segregationist laws throughout the country.

In the wake of Brown, the lynching of Black teenager Emmett Till in August 1955 brought renewed national attention to the need for the Civil Rights Movement. This movement challenged inequalities in housing, voting rights, and public accommodations such as hotels, bathrooms, and transportation. Civil rights activists used many tactics, including nonviolence and court challenges. One of the most famous examples of non-violent protest was  the 1955 Montgomery Bus Boycott, which challenged the city’s bus segregation laws. Both a city ordinance and Alabama law required Black passengers to enter through the rear of the bus and give up their seats to white riders if the bus was full. The boycott officially began on December 5, 1955 after police arrested Rosa Parks for refusing to give up her bus seat. For 381 days, boycotters walked and coordinated carpools to avoid taking the bus. After the Supreme Court held that the city and state bus segregation laws were unconstitutional in Browder v. Gayle (1956), the boycott ended. The activists had successfully and peacefully challenged one component of racial discrimination in Montgomery, Alabama. 

The bus boycott popularized nonviolent direct action as a strategic approach in the Civil Rights Movement. This prompted a series of cases in which the Supreme Court was asked to address  the rights of protesters and the scope of segregation. For example, in the 1960s, sit-ins spread across the nation. Young Black activists, mainly students, sat at whites-only lunch counters knowing they would be refused service and harassed. Indeed, many were arrested and charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct. After hearing several cases, the Court held that sit-in demonstrations could not be prosecuted under federal or state trespass laws. Additionally, the Congress for Racial Equality (CORE) organized “freedom rides” to highlight the widespread violation of the Supreme Court’s decision in Boynton v. Virginia (1960). According to Boynton, segregation on interstate bus routes was unconstitutional. Freedom riders rode buses from Washington, D.C. to cities throughout the South, facing violence and terrorism from white segregationists along the way. 

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the Supreme Court recognized on a case-by-case basis that segregation violated the Constitution. Congress, however, had the power to make one overarching law to eliminate Jim Crow laws. After the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, where Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave his “I Have a Dream” speech, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The act officially banned segregation in public spaces. The same year, the states ratified the Twenty-Fourth Amendment, outlawing poll taxes. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 then eliminated grandfather clauses, poll taxes, and other racially discriminatory legislation used by local governments to disenfranchise voters. 

The African-American Civil Rights Movement inspired other marginalized groups to organize and demand equal opportunities. The women’s rights movement picked up momentum, aided in part by the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the birth control pill in 1960, which allowed women more freedom in family planning. Still, many states had strict laws regulating contraceptives. The Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut challenged its state’s law and appealed their case to the Supreme Court. The case, Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), was the first time the Supreme Court linked reproductive rights to a right to privacy. The following year, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was founded and launched a fierce campaign to secure women’s full economic equality and reproductive rights. Additionally, after an earlier legal victory in Hernandez v. Texas (1954), the Mexican-American Civil Rights Movement gained prominence in the 1960s with the leadership of Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta. Hernandez recognized Mexican Americans as a protected group under the Fourteenth Amendment, but discrimination continued. Chavez and Huerta organized a strike of migrant farm workers in California, who were largely Mexican American. Like the African-American Civil Rights Movement, women and Mexican Americans, along with Asian Americans, Native Americans, and the LBGTQ+ community, made progress during the wave of activism in the 1960s.

Protecting Voices 

Challenges to the status quo of the 1950s and 1960s, like the Civil Rights Movement, tested the Constitution’s protection of individual rights. The Warren Court affirmed these protections after hearing cases about voting representation, First Amendment rights, and the rights of the accused. 

Voter discrimination stemmed from major population shifts during the 20th century. In some states, votes of people who lived in rural areas weighed more than votes of people in urban areas. For example, one vote in the rural Chester County, Tennessee, where 13 percent of residents were nonwhite, weighed eight times more than a vote in the urban Shelby County (home to the city of Memphis), where 36 percent of residents were nonwhite. After the Supreme Court established the one-person, one vote rule in its Baker v. Carr (1962) decision, representation was proportional to population, and the political process became more accessible. 

The Warren Court also clarified First Amendment rights. Fear of communism, which began before the Cold War but escalated at the end of World War II, drove Congress to pass measures restricting free speech and freedom to assemble. The Smith Act of 1940, for example, made it a federal crime to be part of a group that advocates overthrowing the government. Initially, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Smith Act in Dennis v. United States (1951). Then, in 1957, the Supreme Court’s decision in Yates v. United States overturned the convictions of 14 individuals under the Smith Act and severely weakened the law. Yates was one of several Supreme Court decisions in the late 1950s and early 1960s to hold that anti-Communist laws violated civil liberties under the First Amendment. 

In Engel v. Vitale (1962), the Court protected religious freedom by holding that school-sponsored prayer is unconstitutional. New York Times Company v. Sullivan (1964) protected free speech and free press, allowing the media to voice opinions about the government without fear of a libel suit. Later, the Court clarified student free speech rights in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969). A group of students in Des Moines, Iowa wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. When the school disciplined them, their families challenged the punishment as a violation of freedom of expression. The Supreme Court held that the school was in violation of the students’ rights because the protest was peaceful and non-disruptive. However, the Court clarified that schools are within their rights to discipline any behavior that creates a “substantial disruption.”  

Through a series of cases in the 1960s, the Warren Court articulated the rights of the accused (see table below). Using a process called selective incorporation, the Justices applied provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states on a case-by-case basis. (Before an amendment is incorporated to the states, the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights only apply to the federal government.) The Court decided in cases like Mapp v. Ohio (1961), Gideon v. Wainwright (1962), Escobedo v. Illinois  (1964), and Miranda v. Arizona (1966) that there are certain parts of the Bill of Rights that are, as stated in Gideon, “fundamental to a fair trial.”

Conclusion

The Warren Court faced significant criticism. Billboards that appeared throughout the country declared, “Save Our Republic! Impeach Earl Warren!” The Impeach Earl Warren campaign was rooted in opposition to school desegregation and the Brown decision and continued throughout the Chief Justice’s tenure. Opponents also believed the Court overstepped its power and pushed a political agenda on issues that should have been left to the other two branches to resolve. Additionally, some feared that the Court’s decisions expanded the rights of criminals at the expense of police power to protect public safety.

Earl Warren resigned on his own accord in 1969. He was never impeached; and not all of his opponents subscribed to the Impeach Earl Warren movement. The backlash, however, was significant. The controversy over the Warren Court led future presidents Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan to campaign on promises to reform the Supreme Court through their judicial appointments.

In the 16 years of the Warren Court, the Supreme Court’s opinions addressed a number of constitutional questions about justice and democracy that continue to impact the country today.  Its decisions had major implications for the Civil Rights Movement, freedom of speech, and the rights of the accused. The advocacy of lawyers like Thurgood Marshall, Constance Baker Motley, Dorothy Kenyon, and Gus Garcia brought the Fourteenth Amendment to the forefront of their legal arguments, leading to increased application of the principles of equal protection and due process under the law.