Codifying
Racial Oppression
after Reconstruction
Black Codes
- Get out your device or share with someone else
- Search for "Black Codes"
- Explore the search results
- Discuss with your group as you explore
- List five Black Codes in your notes
- Include their dates
In addition to the Black Codes,
whites maintained their system of supremacy through appropriating black culture
and twisting it into a mocking form of entertainment.
This is Jim Crow.
He even wrote a song called Jump Jim Crow that he would customize for local audiences as part of his minstrel show.
Jim Crow was a character created by white comedian Thomas D. Rice around 1830.
Rice performed as Jim Crow in black face,
becoming one of the most famous actors of his time.
Jim Crow laws
- Get out your device or share with someone else
- Search for "Jim Crow laws"
- Explore the search results
- Discuss with your group as you explore
- List five Jim Crow laws in your notes
- Include their dates
Were Jim Crow laws Constitutional?
In what ways did Jim Crow laws violate the Constitution?
Why were these unconstitutional laws permitted?
This is Homer Plessy
Homer Plessy was Creole
and grew up in New Orleans during Reconstruction
He'd seen his rights stripped away by Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
He could easily "pass" as white
(and many like him did),
but he was recruited to challenge one of NOLA's segregation laws.
The Committee had hired a private detective
to take Plessy off the train and deliver him to police, guaranteeing he'd be charged with violating the law.
The Citizens' Committee of New Orleans recruited Plessy
to deliberately violate Louisiana's 1890 Separate Car Act.
They notified the railroad, which opposed the law
because it was expensive to add more cars to trains.
On June 7, 1892, Plessy bought a first-class train ticket
and sat in the car for white riders only.
They all expected the Supreme Court to rule in Plessy's favor because this Jim Crow law was so obviously unconstitutional.
But in a 7-to-1 ruling on Plessy v. Ferguson,
the Supreme Court upheld state laws
requiring racial segregation
under the doctrine of
"separate but equal."
The single dissenting justice wrote:
[I]n view of the constitution, in the eye of the law,
there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here.
Our constitution is color-blind,
and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.
In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law.
The humblest is the peer of the most powerful.
The law regards man as man,
and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color
when his civil rights as guaranteed
by the supreme law of the land are involved.