Race and Rights in Contemporary US Politics

America has a long history of Civil Rights in relation to race which includes slavery, Jim Crow the struggles of the mid 20th century and the ongoing issues highlighted by Black Lives Matter and the long history of the treatment of Native Americans a

The legacy of slavery is still apparent in contemporary American society. While the end of slavery and the victories of the civil rights era in the 1960s and at last the election of a black president have all been hailed as a significant moment, they have also seemed like a false dawn. Major concerns and conflict occur, with persistently high levels of racial inequality and racism.  The deathof George Floyd and the Black LIves Matter protests indicate that race is very much  a live issue in contemporary America. 

Methods Used by Racial Rights Campaigners

From Rosa Parks to Black Lives matter demonstrations and civil resistance have been the part of the fight against racism.

Since the Shelby v Holder ruling and major concerns over the words and policies of President Trump. The NAACP has held a series of demonstrations across southern states in particular. Their Moral Mondays demonstrations, focused particularly in North Carolina, campaign against a variety of concerns including state-based restrictions on minority voting, such as the introduction of photo ID laws and felony voting restrictions. In 2014 the NAACP organised a peaceful sit in at a GOP leaders office in the state legislature in Raleigh, in which 14 people were arrested. 2020 saw major demonstrations and protests after the murder of George Floyd but BLM had started as a result of many similar cases. 

Legal methods

The 14th and 15th amendments of the Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 have been used by pressure groups such the NAACP and  The National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic rights group, to successfully win cases. By using the courts and taking legal action (litigation), pressure groups can challenge federal or state governments by initiating a court case themselves. Alternatively, pressure groups can submit amicus briefs, in which they provide written evidence and argument to the court in a particular case. Examples:

• Brown v. Board of Education,  (1954) Segregated schools in the states are unconstitutional because they violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court found that the separate but equal doctrine adopted in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) "has no place in the field of public education".

• Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States,  (1964) The Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to places of public accommodation patronized by interstate travelers by reason of the Commerce Clause.

• Katzenbach v. McClung, (1964) The power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to a restaurant that is not patronized by interstate travelers but which serves food that has moved in interstate commerce. This ruling makes the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to virtually all businesses.

• Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, (1971) The busing of students to promote racial integration in public schools is constitutional.

Voter registration drives

A major problem for equal rights campaign has been the low turn out of black voters. One problem was the unwillingness of black people to register to vote. Voter-registration campaigns, which expanded quickly, supported by groups such as the NACCP. This involved educating the public in their voting rights, explaining voting processes and helping people with registration.  In the 1950s this was met with fierce resistance, with violence, death threats and lynching, however, the campaign continued to gather pace through the 1960s. 

In the 2016 elections, Native American groups were involved in organising and maximising voting under the banner of nativevote.org (assisting with voter registration) and Get-Out-The-Native-Vote (GOTNV) (election protection and education).

The effectiveness and influence of racial rights campaigns

Voting rights

Although t he right to vote, regardless of race, was established by the 15th Amendment of the Constitution, southern states continued to prevent racial minority voting by using Jim Crow laws — the collective name given to any laws which continued to restrict minority rights — voting was heavily restricted for the black population. As a result black voter registration was close to zero. With many states requiring voter registration to stand for public office, millions of people were locked out of the process of representative democracy.

When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended separate facilities, black rights groups focused on ensuring voting rights. This culminated in the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which overturned the Jim Crow laws inhibiting minority voting. It prevented any state or local government from creating practices that led to racial discrimination in voting. In addition, the Federal Justice Department would vet all state laws to prevent any discriminatory practice.

Hispanic voting power has become increasingly significant. In 2012;  Obama's  share of the Hispanic vote increased from 67 to 71 per cent with an increase in turnout. Hillary Clinton was unable to hold on to this share of the vote, falling back to 65 per cent — possibly a major factor in her failure to win the presidency. The Hispanic influence on voting is rising, with 27.3 million Latinos eligible to vote in 2016 — an increase of 4 million from 2012. 

In the election of 2020 Trump succeed in increasing his support form Hispanic voters although the much larger proportion voted for Biden. Trump's appeal to traditional values of family, anti abortion and law and order may explain this.  However, in the run up to the election and during the election the issue of voter suppression remained relevant. 

There is far greater minority representation today but still a long way to go.

The House has become more diverse at a faster rate than the Senate, a CNBC analysis shows, but both chambers are still predominantly white.  The number of nonwhite lawmakers has gradually increased in the House at a faster rate than in the Senate.  Congress overall is the most diverse it’s ever been. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that in 2019, 60.4% of Americans identified as white only, excluding those who identified as Hispanic or Latino.  But about 79% of Congress is white, according to  Pew Research data.

A number of conservatives continue to call for a greater focus on policing the borders, with tighter immigration laws requiring local law-enforcement officials to question those they suspect of breaking the law, and harsher penalties for those found employing undocumented immigrants. However, the recent Arizona v USA Supreme Court ruling severely restricted the Arizona SBI070 law, which looked to target these issues at a state level. This ruling limited the scope of state officials to tackle immigration and arguably gutted state-based legislation which looked to take a harsh line on immigration. The sensitive nature of this topic, which many argue strikes at the heart of states' rights, was seen in the verdict of Justice Kennedy, who wrote the 'State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law'. In response to the ruling Obama was quick to call for Congress to adopt a comprehensive, and national, immigration reform package as he claimed 'the patchwork of state laws is not a solution to our broken immigration system'.

Yet the continued partisan nature of this debate is highlighted by the fact that no action has been taken by the Obama administration against sanctuary cities that refuse to cooperate with the federal government on immigration matters. Indeed a spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric Holder said there was a difference between 'not enforcing federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law'.

The increasing significance of this issue is highlighted by the fact that some have called immigration 'the new slavery', in the way that it has come to divide America. Thus future elections will in part be fought by those liberals who feel immigration is a national issue, and support the path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, and those conservatives who fear 'big government', and invoke the rights of states in deciding their own approach to dealing with immigration.'

To those who supported substantive equality (including President Johnson), the 1964 and 1965 Acts were the beginnings, not the end, of a campaign for equality. A series of policies were adopted that became known as affirmative action. The measures established ranged from 'soft' measures to target job adverts at minorities to 'hard' measures which included giving quotas and preferences to these groups.

Affirmative action came under immediate scrutiny from those who were critical of what they deemed to be positive discrimination and an increase in federal government intervention. From the 1970s onwards the policies of affirmative action were opposed by those politicians and commentators who saw it as merely reverse discrimination.

In addition, since 1978, a series of Supreme Court decisions have gone some way to water down and limit the forms of affirmative action deemed constitutional, without explicitly declaring affirmative action to be unconstitutional. The most notable of these rulings are listed below.