 Show
This is a preview. Log in through your library. Abstract This Article explores a startling and previously unnoticed line of cases in which state courts in the Jim Crow era ruled against white plaintiffs trying to use common law nuisance doctrine to achieve residential segregation. These "race-nuisance" cases complicate the view of most legal scholarship that state courts during the Jim Crow era openly eschewed the rule of law in service of white supremacy. Instead, the cases provide rich social historical detail showing southern judges wrestling with their competing allegiances to both precedent and the pursuit of racial exclusivity. Surprisingly, the allegiance to precedent generally prevailed. The cases confound prevailing legal theories, particularly new formalism and critical race theory's interest convergence. While new formalists may at first see these cases as supportive of their claims, the Article illustrates the limitations of formalism's reach by also exploring the related line of racially restrictive covenant cases. Similarly, while interest convergence scholars might attempt to read many of the cases as supporting white property owners' interests, this Article demonstrates that the race-nuisance cases are better understood as demonstrating that white interests are multi-faceted. Interest convergence is therefore a useful way to explain unexpected outcomes but not to predict such outcomes. Another line of inquiry raised by the cases is whether courts racialized nuisance doctrine by marking as nuisance conduct associated with blacks and rewarding blacks who adhered to white norms. The first claim is impossible to verify with any certainty--and the second embraces gross oversimplifications of racial group behaviors. In sum, the Article casts substantial doubt on the background assumptions about the way law worked during the Jim Crow era, and thus provides a more textured understanding of that period. Journal Information The Michigan Law Review began publication in 1902 and is the sixth oldest legal journal in the country. The Review originally was intended as a forum for the faculty of the Law Department to publish their legal scholarship. From its inception until 1940, the Review's student members worked under the direction of faculty members who served as Editor-in-Chief. In 1940, the first student Editor-in-Chief was selected. During the years that followed, student editors were given increasing responsibility and autonomy; today, the Review is run with no faculty supervision. Seven of each volume's eight issues ordinarily are composed of articles by legal scholars and practitioners, and notes written by the student editors. One issue in each volume is devoted to book reviews. Occasionally special issues are devoted to symposia or colloquia. Publisher Information The Michigan Law Review publishes eight issues annually. Seven of each volume’s eight issues are composed of two major parts: Articles by legal scholars and practitioners, and Notes by law students. One issue in each volume is devoted to book reviews. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. What were the main goals of Jim Crow laws quizlet?The Jim Crow laws had three overall goals, permitting violence against African Americans, limit their voting abilities, and segregation of not only black communities but white communities as well.
What was the main effect of the Jim Crow system quizlet?What was the main effect of the Jim Crow system? It undermined the civil rights that African Americans had gained during Reconstruction. This diagram shows the cycle that most sharecroppers went through during the Nadir.
Which requirement would be considered a Jim Crow law quizlet?Which requirement would be considered a Jim Crow law? Movie theaters must be racially segregated.
Which of the following would be an example of a Jim Crow law quizlet?Segregation of public schools, public places, and public transportation, and the segregation of restrooms, restaurants, and drinking fountains for whites and blacks. The U.S. military was also segregated.
|
Which of the following came to be hallmarks of upholding the jim crow system?
Urheberrechte © © 2024 berikutyang Inc.
