To what extent was the Supreme Court successful in upholding the Jim Crow laws?

The Supreme Court was the highest ruling authority in America, and was significant because their decision was law. Their decisions with regards to the Jim Crow laws could not be changed. Their choice took precedent.

An incidence of the Supreme Court’s success in enforcing the Jim Crow law was in the Plessey vs Ferguson case of 1896, in which they decided that segregation in schools was legitimate, therefore also applied to all aspects of society. The Court ruled that it did not go against the 14th Amendment, which made it virtually impossible for the blacks to challenge because this was seen was written into the Constitution.

Another example of their success in enforcing the Jim Crow Laws is the WIlliams vs Mississippi case in 1896. They successfully enforced them by ruling that potential voters had to pass literacy tests, that were deliberately hard such that none of the black would be able to vote for someone who could change their situation. Also, to be on a jury, they would have to have passed the literacy test. The unfair literacy test meant of course, that they never would be able to be on a jury and so a fair trial from the Supreme Court would be impossible.

The reason behind the Supreme Court’s decision was that it fit the 14th Amendment, which was in favour of American citizenship. This therefore implied that the African Americans were not seen as citizenship and so justified the need for Jim Crow. This case was significant because the Supreme Court referred back to the Plessey vs Ferguson case as the precedent and ruled that due to that decision to uphold the Jim Crow laws, then therefore the Williams vs Mississippi case (and future cases) would likewise have to uphold them.

Not only were the Supreme Court successful in court cases, but they were also able to persuade people to accept the Jim Crow laws.

Accommodationists such as Booker T Washington believed that the best thing to do was not to challenge the Jim Crows, but rather to accept it and try to make their segregation life as best as possible.

In some ways, this can be seen as a success of the Supreme Court as it suggested that many of the blacks did not want to fight back as they saw Jim Crow as impossible to challenge. However, on the other hand, it could be argued that it was successful from the black point of view because they wanted a better quality of life and wanted to do something to achieve it.

Another factor that demonstrated the Supreme Court’s inability to successfully impose the Jim Crow laws was the slow drift north. This was not just an act of the blacks moving to get away from the Jim Crow laws and the violence but also resulted in the economy in the South weakening due to the lose of the workforce. In some ways this was a direct success of the blacks in challenging the Supreme Court because the Supreme Court could not do anything to prevent it. However, on the other hand, despite the fact that the Supreme Court could not do anything to prevent it, there was still significant white backlash, as they saw it as the blacks taking away their jobs, such as rents put deliberately high.

In addition to this, the Supreme Court could not prevent protest from organisations such as the NAACP, most notably William Du Bois and Ida B Wells, of whom challenged the Jim Crow laws. They used their positions in society as an intellect and a journalist to bring home the injustice that was being carried out in the South. This was successful because it demonstrated that the blacks were not prepared to just be walked over, but rather were going to take a stand for their rights. Even the protests that did not have successful outcomes, such as the Chicago riots, helped to spread the message about the injustice that was being carried out.

I think that despite some of the successes and victories from the blacks, the Supreme Court was able to enforce the Jim Crow laws. I think that their ruling in trials and court cases was significant because it demonstrated that the Supreme Court, the highest authority and the role model for justice in the country allowed discrimination, and so demonstrated to others that despite the end to slavery, the blacks were still not citizens and so Jim Crow had a purpose.

I also think that despite moments where the Supreme Court could not directly prevent matters such as the slow drift north, people had picked up and taken note of their rulings in court case and so, in response of the migration, raised rents and carried out acts of violence to deter people to ensure that the blacks stayed in the South and follow the Jim Crow laws. This demonstrated that although the north was seen as more lenient and understanding, it was not totally free.