Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Civil Rights Movement


Civil Rights Movement 

March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, August 28, 1963, Washington, DC


Civilrightsmovement.com offers a comprehensive overview of the American civil rights movement, highlighting pivotal events such as the 1963 Birmingham campaign and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail." It emphasizes the significance of nonviolent resistance and the moral obligation to challenge unjust laws. The site also details commemorative efforts, including a collaboration between the National Basketball Retired Players Association and Loyola University New Orleans to produce a limited edition print of Dr. King's letter, signed by over 50 former NBA players, to honor the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Additionally, the website provides resources on influential figures like Booker T. Washington and George Washington Carver, as well as topics such as women's suffrage and the Congressional evolution of the United States.


The Civil Rights Movement: A Continuation of Abolitionism

The Civil Rights Movement of the mid-20th century was a direct extension of 19th-century abolitionism, aiming to achieve racial equality in the United States through nonviolent protest and legal reform. It was a response to the entrenched systemic racism and segregation that persisted after the abolition of slavery and the failure of Reconstruction to deliver full equality to African Americans. The movement gained momentum following the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954), which declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional.

Early Strides and Nonviolent Protests

The movement first captured national attention when Rosa Parks was arrested in December 1955 for refusing to give up her seat to a white passenger on a Montgomery, Alabama bus. This act of defiance sparked the Montgomery Bus Boycott, led by Martin Luther King, Jr., and Ralph Abernathy. The boycott lasted over a year, severely impacting the bus system and highlighting the power of nonviolent protest to challenge segregationist practices.

In the early 1960s, college students joined the movement through the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), employing tactics such as sit-ins, boycotts, and marches to desegregate public facilities. Inspired by the methods of Mohandas K. Gandhi, activists successfully pressured businesses such as department stores, supermarkets, libraries, and movie theaters to end discriminatory practices. Despite these successes, resistance was fierce, especially in the former Confederate states, where protesters faced violence, arrest, and, in some cases, death.

Birmingham: The Turning Point

In the spring of 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth launched mass protests in Birmingham, Alabama, which King referred to as "the most segregated city in America." Initial demonstrations had little impact until King was arrested on Good Friday. During his week in jail, King responded to criticism from eight clergymen who had published a letter calling his actions "unwise and untimely."

King’s reply, the Letter from Birmingham Jail (April 16, 1963), became a defining text of the Civil Rights Movement. In it, King eloquently defended nonviolent resistance, declaring, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere," and arguing that individuals have a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws. The letter articulated the urgency of the movement and rejected calls for patience, stating, "We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights." [1]

Meanwhile, King’s lieutenant, James Bevel, organized black youths to march in the streets. Beginning in May 1963, children and teenagers participated in what became known as the Children’s Crusade. Birmingham City Commissioner Eugene "Bull" Connor responded with brutal tactics, using police dogs and high-pressure fire hoses to disperse the demonstrators. Nearly 1,000 young people were arrested. The violence, broadcast on national television, shocked the nation and galvanized public opinion. President John F. Kennedy sent federal troops to Alabama and accelerated the drafting of a comprehensive civil rights bill.

The March on Washington

The protests in Birmingham set the stage for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom on August 28, 1963. Organized by a coalition of civil rights groups known as the "Big Six"—James Farmer (Congress of Racial Equality), Martin Luther King, Jr. (Southern Christian Leadership Conference), John Lewis (SNCC), A. Philip Randolph (Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters), Roy Wilkins (NAACP), and Whitney Young, Jr. (National Urban League)—the march drew more than 200,000 people to the nation’s capital.

The march demanded the passage of meaningful civil rights legislation, the elimination of segregation in public schools, protection for demonstrators against police brutality, a public-works program to create jobs, a $2 per hour minimum wage, and self-governance for the majority-black District of Columbia.

The event’s most memorable moment came when Martin Luther King, Jr., delivered his iconic "I Have a Dream" speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. In it, King envisioned a future where "the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood," and he famously proclaimed, "I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’" [2]

Legislative Milestones

Following the march, President Kennedy’s civil rights bill made progress in Congress but faced opposition from southern legislators. After Kennedy’s assassination on November 22, 1963, President Lyndon B. Johnson took up the cause. Johnson, leveraging his extensive experience in Congress and bipartisan support, secured the passage of the Civil Rights Act on July 2, 1964.

The Act’s key provisions included:

  • Prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce.
  • Outlawing discrimination in employment and creating the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
  • Protecting voting rights by eliminating discriminatory voter qualification tests.
  • Authorizing the withdrawal of federal funds from programs practicing discrimination.
  • Enforcing desegregation in public schools through litigation by the U.S. Attorney General.

The Civil Rights Act marked a historic achievement, addressing many of the movement’s central goals and laying the foundation for further progress in racial equality.

Legacy of the Civil Rights Movement

The Civil Rights Movement reshaped the United States, dismantling the legal framework of segregation and inspiring subsequent movements for social justice. From King’s leadership to the sacrifices of countless activists, the movement demonstrated the power of nonviolent resistance to bring about transformative change.

The movement’s legislative triumphs—culminating in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965—ensured that African Americans gained the full legal protections of citizenship, even as the struggle for equality and justice continued in other forms. The Civil Rights Movement remains a testament to the enduring fight for human rights and the belief that moral courage can overcome systemic oppression.


Footnotes
[1] Martin Luther King, Jr., "Letter from Birmingham Jail," April 16, 1963.
[2] Martin Luther King, Jr., "I Have a Dream," Speech at the March on Washington, August 28, 1963.


The National Basketball Retired Players Association (NBRPA), the only alumni association comprised of former NBA, ABA, Harlem Globetrotter and WNBA players, is commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 150th Anniversary of the 13th Amendment  – in conjunction with the University Honors Program at Loyola University New Orleans and ELEVATE, an academic, athletic and mentoring program for inner-city teens – by issuing a one-of-a-kind limited edition print of Martin Luther King's “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” signed by Dr. King and more than 50 former NBA players. This unique, historic, limited edition print is the perfect collectible for any history and/or sports fanatic.   The 1000 special edition “Path to Freedom” prints are only available as a gift, limit one per patron, for tax-deductible donations of $100.00 or more --- NO LONGER AVAILABLE  



Civil Rights Act  

July 2, 1964


National Archives and Records Administration and Lyndon B. Johnson Library


The Civil Rights Act of 1964, signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 2, 1964, represented a landmark achievement in American legislative history. This sweeping legislation prohibited discrimination in public places, mandated the integration of schools and other public facilities, and made employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin illegal. It was the most comprehensive civil rights legislation since the Reconstruction era, addressing systemic racial inequalities entrenched in American society.

The Road to Legislation

The impetus for the Civil Rights Act was a nationally televised address delivered by President John F. Kennedy on June 6, 1963. In this speech, Kennedy called on the nation to confront its history of racial injustice, stating, "The rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened." He urged Congress to enact legislation guaranteeing equal treatment for all Americans, irrespective of race. Kennedy's proposal sought to address a range of issues, including voting rights, desegregation of public accommodations and schools, and nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs.

Despite Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963, his vision for civil rights reform persisted. President Lyndon Johnson took up the cause with determination, using his political acumen to navigate the contentious legislative process. Johnson emphasized the moral imperative of the bill, framing its passage as a tribute to Kennedy’s legacy and a necessity for the nation’s progress.

Provisions of the Act

The Civil Rights Act outlawed segregation in businesses such as theaters, restaurants, and hotels, ensuring that public accommodations were accessible to all. It ended racial segregation in public spaces, including swimming pools, libraries, and schools. Additionally, the act banned discriminatory practices in employment, establishing the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to enforce its provisions. The legislation also prohibited discrimination in any program receiving federal financial assistance, leveraging federal authority to promote equality.

Legislative Challenges and Triumphs

The passage of the Civil Rights Act faced significant resistance, particularly from lawmakers in the South. In the House of Representatives, opponents stalled the bill in the House Rules Committee. Meanwhile, in the Senate, a coalition of segregationist senators launched a filibuster in an effort to block the bill. The filibuster, which lasted for 60 days, became one of the longest in Senate history.

Despite these obstacles, supporters of the legislation persevered. In early 1964, House proponents circumvented the Rules Committee by threatening to bring the bill directly to the floor. In the Senate, the filibuster was broken through the combined efforts of Senator Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota, who led the floor debate, and Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen of Illinois, whose ability to rally Republican support proved critical. Dirksen famously remarked, "Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come," as he urged his colleagues to back the bill.

President Johnson also played a pivotal role, leveraging his extensive legislative experience and relationships to build bipartisan coalitions. His determination and skillful leadership were instrumental in securing the passage of the act.

Legacy of the Civil Rights Act

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 marked a turning point in the struggle for racial equality in the United States. By addressing systemic discrimination and segregation, it laid the foundation for subsequent civil rights advancements, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The establishment of the EEOC provided an institutional mechanism to combat workplace discrimination, further extending the reach of the legislation.

Although the act did not end racism or discrimination, it represented a significant step toward fulfilling the nation’s promise of equality. It remains a cornerstone of civil rights law, underscoring the federal government’s commitment to justice and equal opportunity for all Americans.

For more information about the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and related historical documents, visit the National Archives’ Digital Classroom Teaching With Documents Lesson Plan. [1]


Footnote
[1] National Archives, "Teaching With Documents: The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission."



A Republican Account


REPUBLICANS PASSED THE FIRST CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, IN 1866

By: Human Events --- 4/17/2012 03:01 PM

Thanks to Republicans beginning to appreciate the heritage of our Grand Old Party, it has become better known that Republicans in Congress supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act much more than did the Democrats. Indeed, the legislator most responsible for breaking the Democrat filibuster was a Republican senator, Everett Dirksen. 

And now, the question that should be before us: How did that landmark legislation come to be? The answer to that is a source of pride for all Republicans today.

The origin of the 1964 Civil Rights Act can be traced back to the Reconstruction era. That was when the Republican Party enacted the first civil rights act ever, the 1866 Civil Rights Act. Never heard of it? Democrat history professors would rather you didn’t. With that law, Republicans took a big step toward making Abraham Lincoln’s vision for “a new birth of freedom” a reality.

Ominously, the assassination of the Great Emancipator had left the presidency to his Democrat vice president, Andrew Johnson. Senator Lyman Trumbull (R-IL), co-author of the 13th Amendment banning slavery, also wrote the 1866 Civil Rights Act. Republican support was nearly unanimous, while Democrats were unanimously opposed. This would be the first time Congress overrode a presidential veto of a significant bill.

The law conferred U.S. citizenship on all African-Americans, according them “full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property as is enjoyed by white citizens.” Despite Democrat objections, Republicans made sure African-Americans had the right to own property, engage in business, sign contracts and file lawsuits.

Andrew Johnson refused to enforce this law in the southern states, so it had little effect there. However, many racially discriminatory laws in the North were repealed or struck down as a result.

Sixty-four of eighty Democrats in the House of Representatives had voted against the 13th Amendment. And so, Republicans feared that once the southern states were back in the Union, a Democrat majority along with a racist Democrat in the White House might undo all they had accomplished for African-Americans. What if they repealed the new Civil Rights Act?

To keep that law safe from a future Democrat Congress, Republicans enshrined its precepts in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. Another point of pride for the GOP is that Republicans voted unanimously for the 14th Amendment, while Democrats voted unanimously against it.



Republicans followed this success with several more civil rights acts during the Ulysses Grant administration, including one that effectively outlawed the Ku Klux Klan. The next step was the brainchild of one of our party’s greatest heroes, Senator Charles Sumner. He wrote the 1875 Civil Rights Act, which anticipated the 1964 Civil Rights Act with its ban on racial discrimination in public accommodations. He had been pushing for the bill for years. On his deathbed, he told a former Attorney General: “You must take care of the civil rights bill – my bill, the civil rights bill – don’t let it fail.”

Though the law came a decade too late to have much of an impact in the Democrat-controlled South, many discriminatory practices in northern states were eliminated. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1883. The majority opinion declaring that 14th Amendment guarantees did not extend to acts by private citizens and businesses was the reason the 1964 Civil Rights Act would have to be based more tenuously on the federal government’s authority to regulate interstate commerce.

Nine decades would pass before the Republican Party was able to enact further civil rights legislation. President Dwight Eisenhower signed into law the 1957 Civil Rights Act, whose author was a former chairman of the Republican National Committee. Enforcement was improved by the GOP’s 1960 Civil Rights Act.

Three years later, Republican congressmen introduced a bill guaranteeing equal access to public accommodations. The Kennedy administration countered with a weaker version of this bill, which then became the basis for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Sadly, it was Democrat defiance of the civil rights movement that postponed so much progress, from 1866 until 1964. To quote my own book, “The more we Republicans know about the history of our party, the more the Democrats will worry about the future of theirs.”

This article is adapted from Back to Basics for the Republican Party, Michael Zak’s history of the GOP from the Republican point of view. See www.grandoldpartisan.com for more information.




A Democratic Account

The Conservative Fantasy History of Civil Rights
By Jonathan Chait
   

Ronald Reagan, Strom Thurmond, and other civil rights heroes. Not pictured: black people.

The civil rights movement, once a controversial left-wing fringe, has grown deeply embedded into the fabric of our national story. This is a salutary development, but a problematic one for conservatives, who are the direct political descendants of (and, in the case of some of the older members of the movement, the exact same people as) the strident opponents of the civil rights movement. It has thus become necessary for conservatives to craft an alternative story, one that absolves their own ideology of any guilt. The right has dutifully set itself to its task, circulating its convoluted version of history, honing it to the point where it can be repeated by any defensive College Republican in his dorm room. Kevin Williamson’s cover story in National Review is the latest version of what is rapidly congealing into conservatism’s revisionist dogma.

The mainstream, and correct, history of the politics of civil rights is as follows. Southern white supremacy operated out of the Democratic Party beginning in the nineteenth century, but the party began attracting northern liberals, including African-Americans, into an ideologically cumbersome coalition. Over time the liberals prevailed, forcing the Democratic Party to support civil rights, and driving conservative (and especially southern) whites out, where they realigned with the Republican Party.

Williamson crafts a tale in which the Republican Party is and always has been the greatest friend the civil rights cause ever had. The Republican takeover of the white South had absolutely nothing to do with civil rights, the revisionist case proclaims, except insofar as white Southerners supported Republicans because they were more pro-civil rights.

One factoid undergirding this bizarre interpretation is that the partisan realignment obviously took a long time to complete — Southerners still frequently voted Democratic into the seventies and eighties. This proves, according to Williamson, that a backlash against civil rights could not have driven southern whites out of the Democratic Party. “They say things move slower in the South — but not that slow,” he insists.

His story completely ignores the explicit revolt by conservative Southerners against the northern liberal civil rights wing, beginning with Strom Thurmond, who formed a third-party campaign in 1948 in protest against Harry Truman’s support for civil rights. Thurmond received 49 percent of the vote in Louisiana, 72 percent in South Carolina, 80 percent in Alabama, and 87 percent in Mississippi. He later, of course, switched to the Republican Party.

Thurmond’s candidacy is instructive. Democratic voting was deeply acculturated among southern whites as a result of the Civil War. When southern whites began to shake loose of it, they began at the presidential level, in protest against the civil rights leanings of the national wing. It took decades for the transformation to filter down, first to Congressional-level representation (Thurmond, who Williamson mentions only in his capacity as a loyal Democrat, finally switched to the GOP in 1964), and ultimately to local-level government. The most fervently white supremacist portions of the South were also the slowest to shed their Confederate-rooted one-party traditions. None of this slowness actually proves Williamson’s contention that the decline of the Democratic Party in the South was unrelated to race.

Williamson concedes, with inadvertently hilarious understatement, that the party “went through a long dry spell on civil-rights progress” — that would be the century that passed between Reconstruction and President Eisenhower’s minimalist response to massive resistance in 1957. But after this wee dry spell, the party resumed and maintained its natural place as civil rights champion. To the extent that Republicans replaced Democrats in the South, Williamson sees their support for civil rights as the cause. (“Republicans did begin to win some southern House seats, and in many cases segregationist Democrats were thrown out by southern voters in favor of civil-rights Republicans.”) As his one data point, Williamson cites the victory of George Bush in Texas over a Democrat who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He correctly cites Bush’s previous record of moderation on civil rights but neglects to mention that Bush also opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Williamson does feel obliged to mention Barry Goldwater’s opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but defends it as a “principled” opposition to the “extension of federal power.” At the same time, he savages southern Democrats for their opposition to the 14th and 15th Amendments, Reconstruction, anti-lynching laws, and so on. It does not seem to occur to him that many of these opponents also presented their case in exactly the same pro-states' rights, anti-federal power terms that Goldwater employed. Williamson is willing to concede that opponents of civil rights laws have philosophical principles behind them, but only if they are Republican. (Perhaps is the process by which figures like Thurmond and Jesse Helms were cleansed of their racism and became mere ideological opponents of federal intrusion.)

To the extent that the spirit of the all-white, pro-states' rights, rigidly “Constitutionalist” southern Democrats exists at all today, Williamson locates it not in the nearly all-white, pro-states' rights, rigidly “Constitutionalist” southern Republicans, but rather in the current Democratic Party. This is possibly the most mind-boggling claim in Williamson’s essay:

Democrats who argue that the best policies for black Americans are those that are soft on crime and generous with welfare are engaged in much the same sort of cynical racial calculation President Johnson was practicing when he informed skeptical southern governors that his plan for the Great Society was “to have them niggers voting Democratic for the next two hundred years.” Johnson’s crude racism is, happily, largely a relic of the past, but his strategy endures. 

The strategy of crude Democratic racism endures! That this strategy has sucked in more than 90 percent of the black electorate, and is currently being executed at the highest level by Barack Obama (who — at this point, it may be necessary to inform Williamson — is black) suggests a mind-blowing level of false consciousness at work among the African-American community.

Williamson does stumble on to one interesting vein of history, but completely misses its import. In the course of dismissing Goldwater’s 1964 opposition to the Civil Rights Act, he notes that the Republican Party declined to fully follow his lead. The party platform, he notes, called for “full implementation and faithful execution of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” He does not mention that this language came after party conservatives rejected amendments with stronger language endorsing “enforcement” of the civil rights law and describing the protection of the right to vote as a “constitutional responsibility.” (A bit of this story can be found in Ben Wallace-Wells’s fantastic piece on George Romney in the current print issue, and more in Geoffrey Kabaservice’s “Rule and Ruin.”)

It is true that most Republicans in 1964 held vastly more liberal positions on civil rights than Goldwater. This strikes Williamson as proof of the idiosyncratic and isolated quality of Goldwater’s civil rights stance. What it actually shows is that conservatives had not yet gained control of the Republican Party.

But conservative Republicans — those represented politically by Goldwater, and intellectually by William F. Buckley and National Review — did oppose the civil rights movement. Buckley wrote frankly about his endorsement of white supremacy: “the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically.” More often conservatives argued on grounds of states’ rights, or freedom of property, or that civil rights leaders were annoying hypocrites, or that they had undermined respect for the law.

Rick Perlstein surveyed the consistent hostility of contemporary conservatives to the civil rights movement. Ronald Reagan, like many conservatives, attributed urban riots to the breakdown in respect for authority instigated by the civil rights movement’s embrace of civil disobedience (a “great tragedy that began when we began compromising with law and order, and people started choosing which laws they'd break, thundered Reagan”). Buckley sneered at the double standard of liberal Democrats — in 1965, he complained, Vice-President Hubert Humphrey attended the funeral of a white woman shot by the Klan for riding in a car with a black man, but did not attend the funeral of a white cop shot by a black man. The right seethed with indignation at white northern liberals, decrying the fate of their black allies while ignoring the assaults mounted by blacks against whites.

And of course this sentiment — exactly this sentiment — right now constitutes the major way in which conservatives talk about race. McKay Coppins has a fine story about how conservative media has been reporting since 2009 on an imagined race war, a state of affairs in which blacks routinely assault whites, which is allegedly being covered up by authorities in the government and media. “In Obama's America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering,” said Rush Limbaugh in 2009.

We should not equate this particular line of hysteria with Buckley-esque defenses of white supremacy, or even with Goldwater-esque concern for states’ rights. The situation is obviously far more different than it is similar. Conservatives are not attacking measures to stop lynching or defending formal legal segregation. The racial paranoia of a Rush Limbaugh or an Andrew Breitbart – Williamson defends both – is far less violent or dangerous than the white racial paranoia of previous generations. That undeniable progress seems to be more tenable ground for Williamson to mount his defense of conservatism and race. Conservatives ought to just try arguing that, while conservatives were wrong to perceive themselves as victims of overweening government and racial double-standards before the civil rights movement triumphed, they are right to do so now.
They need to try something different, anyway. The pseudo-historical attempt to attach conservatism to the civil rights movement is just silly. Here's another idea: Why not get behind the next civil rights idea (gay marriage) now? It would save future generations of conservative apparatchiks from writing tendentious essays insisting the Republican Party was always for it.


National Collegiate Honor’s Council Partners in the Park Class of 2017 at the Benjamin Franklin Museum. Sophia  Semensky is holding an American Museum Magazine or Repository of Ancient and Modern Fugitive Pieces, &c., No. 5 May, 1787, Published by Mathew Carey, Philadelphia. The issue is open to the full printing of The Constitution of the Pennsylvania Society, for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, and the Relief of Free Negroes, Unlawfully Held in Bondage: begun in the year 1774, and enlarged on the twenty-third of April, 1787. The Constitution is signed in type Benjamin Franklin, President.  This Pamphlet was gifted to Independence Hall National Historic Park by Stanley and Naomi Yavneh Klos in memory fo Eilleen Klos and Kuni Yavneh. – For more information visit our National Park and NCHC Partners in the Park Class of 2017 website

Teaching With Documents


Court Documents Related to Martin Luther King, Jr., and Memphis Sanitation Workers  - Courtesy of the National Archives

Background

The name of Martin Luther King, Jr., is intertwined with the history of the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s in the United States. The Montgomery bus boycott, the freedom rides, the Birmingham campaign, the March on Washington, the Selma march, the Chicago campaign, and the Memphis boycott are some of the more noteworthy battlefields where King and his followers--numerous in numbers, humble and great in name-- fought for the equal rights and equal justice that the United States Constitution ensures for all its citizens. King, building on the tradition of civil disobedience and passive resistance earlier expressed by Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Gandhi, waged a war of nonviolent direct action against opposing forces of racism and prejudice that were embodied in the persons of local police, mayors, governors, angry citizens, and night riders of the Ku Klux Klan. The great legal milestones achieved by this movement were the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

In the later 1960s, the targets of King's activism were less often the legal and political obstacles to the exercise of civil rights by blacks, and more often the underlying poverty, unemployment, lack of education, and blocked avenues of economic opportunity confronting black Americans. Despite increasing militancy in the movement for black power, King steadfastly adhered to the principles of nonviolence that had been the foundation of his career. Those principles were put to a severe test in his support of a strike by sanitation workers in Memphis, Tennessee. This was King's final campaign before his death.

During a heavy rainstorm in Memphis on February 1, 1968, two black sanitation workers had been crushed to death when the compactor mechanism of the trash truck was accidentally triggered. On the same day in a separate incident also related to the inclement weather, 22 black sewer workers had been sent home without pay while their white supervisors were retained for the day with pay. About two weeks later, on February 12, more than 1,100 of a possible 1,300 black sanitation workers began a strike for job safety, better wages and benefits, and union recognition. Mayor Henry Loeb, unsympathetic to most of the workers' demands, was especially opposed to the union. Black and white civic groups in Memphis tried to resolve the conflict, but the mayor held fast to his position.

As the strike lengthened, support for the strikers within the black community of Memphis grew. Organizations such as COME (Community on the Move for Equality) established food and clothing banks in churches, took up collections for strikers to meet rent and mortgages, and recruited marchers for frequent demonstrations. King's participation in forming a city-wide boycott to support the striking workers was invited by the Reverend James Lawson, pastor of the Centenary Methodist Church in Memphis and an adviser to the strikers. Lawson was a seasoned veteran of the civil rights movement and an experienced trainer of activists in the philosophy and methods of nonviolent resistance.

At that time King was involved in planning with other civil rights workers the Poor People's Campaign for economic opportunity and equality. He was also zigzagging by airplane through the eastern United States meeting speaking engagements and attending important social events as head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC).

Nevertheless, King agreed to lend his support to the sanitation workers, spoke at a rally in Memphis March 18, and promised to lead the large march and work stoppage planned for later in the month.

Unfortunately the demonstration on March 28 turned sour when a group of rowdy students at the tail end of the long parade of demonstrators used the signs they carried to break windows of businesses. Looting ensued. The march was halted, the demonstrators dispersed, and King was safely escorted from the scene. About 60 people had been injured, and one young man, a looter, was killed. This episode prompted the city of Memphis to bring a formal complaint in the District Court against King, Hosea Williams, James Bevel, James Orange, Ralph Abernathy, and Bernard Lee, King's associates in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC).

The outbreak of violence deeply distressed King. In the next few days he and fellow SCLC leaders negotiated with the disagreeing factions in Memphis. When assured of their unity and commitment to nonviolence, King came back for another march, at first scheduled for April 5. In the meantime, U.S. District Court Judge Bailey Brown granted the city of Memphis a temporary restraining order against King and his associates. But the SCLC's planning and training for a peaceful demonstration had intensified. Lawson and Andrew Young, representing the SCLC, met with the judge April 4 and worked out a broad agreement for the march to proceed April 8. The details of the agreement would be put into place the next day, April 5.

This was the message that Young conveyed to King as they were getting ready to go out to dinner. Moments later, on that evening of April 4, 1968, as King stepped out of his motel room to join his colleagues for dinner, he was assassinated.

Other Resources

Books

Branch, Taylor. Parting the Waters: America in the King Years, 1954-1963. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988.
Branch, Taylor. Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years, 1963-1965. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1998.
Carson, Clayborne, et al., eds. The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader: Documents, Speeches, and Firsthand Accounts from the Black Freedom Struggle, 1954-1990. New York: Penguin Books, 1991.
Fairclough, Adam. Martin Luther King, Jr. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1995.
Garrow, David. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. New York: William Morrow, 1986.
Halberstam, David. The Children. New York: Random House, 1998.
Hampton, Henry, and Steve Fayer. Voices of Freedom: An Oral History of the Civil Rights Movement from the 1950s through the 1980s. New York: Bantam Books, 1990.
King, Martin Luther, Jr. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. Edited by Clayborne Carson. New York: Warner Books, 1998.
King, Martin Luther, Jr. The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. Edited by James Washington. New York: HarperCollins, 1986.
Williams, Juan. Eyes on the Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965. New York: Penguin Books, 1987.

Videos and Software

Eyes on the Prize: A History of the Civil Rights Movement (12 one-hour videotapes). ABC Laserdisc.
Encarta Africana. Microsoft CD-ROM.

Web Sites

The Web site of the Martin Luther King, Jr., Papers Project at Stanford University (http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/) includes links to biography, articles, chronology, and reference sources about King. This site also has links to key King documents.
Celebrating Black History Month on the Web has a site, organized by the University of Colorado, with a broad range of information at http://www-libraries.colorado.edu/ps/gov/us/blackhistory.htm.
Civil Rights Museum has an Interactive Tour link at http://www.civilrightsmuseum.org/gallery/movement.aspthat gives a survey of civil rights for African Americans from the colonial period to the present.


Chronology of Major U.S. Civil Rights Laws
and Constitutional Amendments

1. The 13th Amendment to the Constitution (1865)

Description: Ratified on December 6, 1865, the 13th Amendment abolished slavery and involuntary servitude in the United States, except as punishment for a crime. It marked the official end of legal slavery and was the first of the three Reconstruction Amendments aimed at securing civil rights for African Americans.


2. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution (1868)

Description: Ratified on July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, including formerly enslaved individuals. It guaranteed equal protection under the law and prohibited states from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process. It has since been a cornerstone for many civil rights decisions.


3. The 15th Amendment to the Constitution (1870)

Description: Ratified on February 3, 1870, the 15th Amendment prohibited the federal and state governments from denying citizens the right to vote based on "race, color, or previous condition of servitude." This amendment aimed to enfranchise African American men during Reconstruction.


4. Civil Rights Act of 1875

Description: Enacted on March 1, 1875, this law prohibited racial discrimination in public accommodations, transportation, and jury service. However, it was largely unenforced and declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in The Civil Rights Cases (1883), which limited federal authority over private acts of discrimination.


5. The 19th Amendment to the Constitution (1920)

Description: Ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th Amendment granted women the right to vote. This monumental achievement followed decades of activism by the women's suffrage movement and marked a significant expansion of civil rights in the United States.


6. Executive Order 8802 (1941)

Description: Issued by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on June 25, 1941, this order prohibited racial discrimination in the defense industry and government employment. It established the Fair Employment Practices Committee (FEPC) to address workplace discrimination during World War II.


7. Civil Rights Act of 1957

Description: Signed into law on September 9, 1957, this act established the Civil Rights Division within the Department of Justice and empowered federal prosecutors to seek injunctions against voter intimidation or discrimination. It also created the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights to investigate civil rights violations.


8. Civil Rights Act of 1960

Description: Enacted on May 6, 1960, this law strengthened federal oversight of voter registration and established penalties for obstructing voting rights. It sought to address ongoing discrimination in voter access, particularly in the South.


9. The 24th Amendment to the Constitution (1964)

Description: Ratified on January 23, 1964, the 24th Amendment abolished the poll tax in federal elections. Poll taxes had been used to disenfranchise poor and minority voters, particularly African Americans in the South.


10. Civil Rights Act of 1964

Description: Signed into law on July 2, 1964, this landmark legislation prohibited discrimination in public accommodations, employment, and federally funded programs. It established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to address workplace discrimination and authorized federal enforcement of desegregation in schools and public facilities.


11. Voting Rights Act of 1965

Description: Enacted on August 6, 1965, this law outlawed discriminatory practices like literacy tests and poll taxes that were used to disenfranchise African Americans. It also authorized federal oversight of voter registration in areas with a history of discriminatory practices, significantly increasing voter participation among minority groups.


12. Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act)

Description: Signed on April 11, 1968, this law prohibited discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, religion, or national origin. It was enacted shortly after the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., in response to widespread racial unrest.


13. Title IX of the Education Amendments (1972)

Description: Enacted on June 23, 1972, Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any federally funded education program or activity. It has been particularly impactful in promoting gender equality in sports and educational opportunities.


14. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (1990)

Description: Signed into law on July 26, 1990, the ADA prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in employment, public accommodations, transportation, and other areas of public life. It also requires reasonable accommodations to ensure accessibility.


15. Civil Rights Act of 1991

Description: Enacted on November 21, 1991, this law strengthened provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by providing for damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination. It also clarified standards for proving disparate impact in discrimination cases.





Dad, why are you a Republican?

Historic Pillars of the Republican Party - GOP Foundational Legislation that Encourages & Safeguards U.S. Public Education, Social Justice, Conservation and Fiscal Responsibility. "Imitation is the sincerest form of change and it reaches its political pinnacle when others, especially the opposition, assert your ideas and laws as their own." - Stan Klos - Please Visit Republicanism.us


The Congressional Evolution of the United States of America 

For students and teachers of U.S. history, this video features Stanley and Christopher Klos presenting America's Four United Republics Curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. Filmed in December 2015, this video is an informal recording by an audience member capturing a presentation attended by approximately 200 students, professors, and guests. To explore the full curriculum, [download it here]. 


Continental Congress of the United Colonies Presidents 
Sept. 5, 1774 to July 1, 1776


September 5, 1774
October 22, 1774
October 22, 1774
October 26, 1774
May 20, 1775
May 24, 1775
May 25, 1775
July 1, 1776

Commander-in-Chief United Colonies & States of America
George Washington: June 15, 1775 - July 1, 1776


Continental Congress of the United States Presidents 
July 2, 1776 to February 28, 1781

July 2, 1776
October 29, 1777
November 1, 1777
December 9, 1778
December 10, 1778
September 28, 1779
September 29, 1779
February 28, 1781

Commander-in-Chief United States of America
George Washington: July 2, 1776 - February 28, 1781


Presidents of the United States in Congress Assembled
March 1, 1781 to March 3, 1789

March 1, 1781
July 6, 1781
July 10, 1781
Declined Office
July 10, 1781
November 4, 1781
November 5, 1781
November 3, 1782
November 4, 1782
November 2, 1783
November 3, 1783
June 3, 1784
November 30, 1784
November 22, 1785
November 23, 1785
June 5, 1786
June 6, 1786
February 1, 1787
February 2, 1787
January 21, 1788
January 22, 1788
January 21, 1789

Commander-in-Chief United States of America
George Washington: March 2, 1781 - December 23, 1783

Articles of Confederation Congress
United States in Congress Assembled (USCA) Sessions

USCA
Session Dates
USCA Convene Date
President(s)
First
03-01-1781 to 11-04-1781*
03-02-1781
Second
11-05-1781 to 11-03-1782
11-05-1781
Third
11-04-1782 to 11-02-1783
11-04-1782
Fourth
11-03-1783 to 10-31-1784
11-03-1783
Fifth
11-01-1784 to 11-06-1785
11-29-1784
Sixth
11-07-1785 to 11-05-1786
11-23-1785
Seventh
11-06-1786 to 11-04-1787
02-02-1787
Eighth
11-05-1787 to 11-02-1788
01-21-1788
Ninth
11-03-1788 to 03-03-1789**
None
None

* The Articles of Confederation was ratified by the mandated 13th State on February 2, 1781, and the dated adopted by the Continental Congress to commence the new  United States in Congress Assembled government was March 1, 1781.  The USCA convened under the Articles of Confederation Constitution on March 2, 1781.  

** On September 14, 1788, the Eighth United States in Congress Assembled resolved that March 4th, 1789, would be commencement date of the Constitution of 1787's federal government thus dissolving the USCA on March 3rd, 1789.


Presidents of the United States of America
1789 - Present

POTUS - CLICK HERE


United Colonies and States First Ladies
1774 - Present

FLOTUS - CLICK HERE



Capitals of the United Colonies and States of America

Philadelphia
Sept. 5, 1774 to Oct. 24, 1774
Philadelphia
May 10, 1775 to Dec. 12, 1776
Baltimore
Dec. 20, 1776 to Feb. 27, 1777
Philadelphia
March 4, 1777 to Sept. 18, 1777
Lancaster
September 27, 1777
York
Sept. 30, 1777 to June 27, 1778
Philadelphia
July 2, 1778 to June 21, 1783
Princeton
June 30, 1783 to Nov. 4, 1783
Annapolis
Nov. 26, 1783 to Aug. 19, 1784
Trenton
Nov. 1, 1784 to Dec. 24, 1784
New York City
Jan. 11, 1785 to Nov. 13, 1788
New York City
October 6, 1788 to March 3,1789
New York City
March 3,1789 to August 12, 1790
Philadelphia
Dec. 6,1790 to May 14, 1800       
Washington DC
November 17,1800 to Present

Chart Comparing Presidential Powers Click Here


Secure a unique primary source exhibit and a professional speaker for your next event by reaching out to Historic.us today. Serving a wide range of clients—including Fortune 500 companies, associations, nonprofits, colleges, universities, national conventions, and PR and advertising agencies—we are a premier national exhibitor of primary sources. Our engaging and educational historic displays are crafted to captivate and inform your audience, creating a memorable experience. Join our roster of satisfied clients and see how Historic.us can elevate your event. Contact us to explore options tailored to your audience and objectives!
Historic.us
A Non-profit Corporation

Primary Source Exhibits


Exhibit Inquiries

202-239-1774 | Office

Stan@Historic.us
Website: www.Historic.us

Edited: Open AI(2024)ChatGPT [Large language model] - https://chatgpt.com