The Beginning of the End for Authoritarian Rule in America:Smith v. Allwrightand the Abolition of the White Primary in the Deep South, 1944–1948

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert W. Mickey
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Body Politic ◽  
Deep South ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Democratic Development ◽  
Democratic Rule ◽  
Intraparty Conflict ◽  
The U.S

In 1944, the U.S. Supreme Court inSmith v. Allwrightshocked the southern body politic by invalidating the white-only Democratic primary. Interpreting the eleven states of the old Confederacy as enclaves of authoritarian rule, this article views Smith as beginning a long process that culminated in the early 1970s with the consolidation of democratic rule in America. Smith v. Allwright transformed the politics of all eleven enclaves, challenging rulers in their roles both as party officials and as lawmakers. Filtered through various configurations of intraparty conflict, political institutions, and black insurgency, however, the ruling shaped the politics of each enclave differently. This article compares the ruling's effects on three similarly-situated enclaves—Georgia, Mississippi, and South Carolina. It suggests how Smith v. Allwright positioned these enclaves differently as they faced several other democratization challenges over the next three decades. The article closes with a discussion of how southern enclaves ultimately took divergent paths out of Dixie, why these different modes of democratization matter today, and how the reframing of southern political history developed here engages with recent research on America's distinctive democratic development.

Suffrage Restriction under Attack, 1944–47

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Mickey
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
White Supremacy ◽  
Deep South ◽  
Southern Politics ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Black Protest ◽  
Intraparty Conflict ◽  
Party State ◽  
The U.S

This chapter examines the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Smith v. Allwright that challenged the restriction on suffrage: it invalidated the all-white Democratic primary and struck at the heart of southern politics—one-party rule based on white supremacy. It first considers the Supreme Court's challenge to the white primary in relation to rulers' dilemmas, opportunities, and options before discussing narratives of enclave experiences with the white primary challenge in South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia. It then compares outer South and Deep South responses to Smith, showing that Georgia and South Carolina featured more impressive black mobilizations than Mississippi. However, the consequences of these episodes were not driven solely by such forces as economic development or black protest infrastructure. Rather, given different configurations of intraparty conflict, party–state institutions, and levels of black insurgency, Smith and the responses it invoked had different consequences for each enclave.

Partisan Journalism and the Rise of the Republican Party in South Carolina, 1959–1962

2013 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sid Bedingfield
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Political Engagement ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
Professional Standards ◽  
Partisan Politics ◽  
Deep South ◽  
American Press ◽  
The U.S

When political journalist William D. Workman, Jr., resigned from Charleston’s News and Courier and announced plans to run for the U.S. Senate in 1962, he said it would be “unethical” to combine “objective reporting with partisan politics.” Yet Workman’s personal papers reveal that, for three years, he and editor Thomas R. Waring, Jr., had been working with Republican leaders to build a conservative party to challenge Deep South Democrats. Workman’s story provides an example of how partisan activism survived in the twentieth-century American press, despite the rise of professional standards prohibiting political engagement.

scholarly journals Segregation Academies Then and School Choice Configurations Today in Deep South States

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Marilyn Grady ◽  
Sharon Hoffman
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
School Choice ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
School Funding ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
Board Of Education ◽  
Deep South ◽  
Public School Funding ◽  
The U.S

In the following article, we present a brief historical review of segregation academies and their impact on students and public schools. Based on the review, we provide a portrait of the vestiges of segregation academies that appear to be currently re-emerging in different educational configurations throughout the U.S. and particularly in Deep South states. The purpose of a historical study is to provide a descriptive overview of specific social problems confined within a predetermined timeframe (Danto, 2008). This historical review’s purpose was to address the following inquiry: What were the characteristics of Deep South segregation academies designed to circumvent Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka? In what ways are these characteristics manifested in 2015 school choice configurations in the Deep South states, specifically Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina? To what extent, if any, did these manifested characteristics affect 2015 public school funding in Deep South states?

Driven from the House of Their Fathers

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Mickey
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Racial Equality ◽  
Deep South ◽  
National Party ◽  
Central State ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Intraparty Conflict ◽  
Party State

This chapter examines President Harry S. Truman's commitment of the National Democratic Party to the cause of racial equality and the responses to them by Deep South authoritarian enclaves. It first provides an overview of the central state, national party, and southern enclaves during the period 1932–1946 before discussing the causes and consequences of the revolt by the States' Rights Party (SRP), also known as the Dixiecrats. It then considers southern enclaves' growing unease with the national party through the 1930s and 1940s, along with the experiences of South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia. It shows that the Truman shock and responses to it varied within the Deep South depending on different configurations of intraparty conflict and party–state institutions.

Desegregating the South, 1955-1970

1979 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Harvie Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
School Desegregation ◽  
Deep South ◽  
The South ◽  
School Officials ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Upper South ◽  
Brown Decision

Southern school desegregation after Brown progressed through four successive stages. The first might be termed absolute defiance, lasting from 1955 until the collapse of Virginia’s massive resistance in 1959. The second was token compliance, stretching from 1959 until passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. With that act, a third phase of modest integration began with the efforts of southern school officials to avoid fund cutoffs by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The 1968 Supreme Court decision of Green v. County School Board commenced a fourth phase of massive integration during which the South became the most integrated section of the country. Yet even as the fourth phase developed, a fifth—that of resegregation— was emerging in some southern localities. Breaks in history, of course, are never so neat as their chroniclers might wish. During the defiant stage, for example, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Florida practiced token compliance. And during much of the token compliance stage, Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina practiced total defiance. The different phases thus express only regional momentum as a whole and not the progress, or lack thereof, of a particular state. Even as a gauge of regional momentum, moreover, these phases are imperfect, given wide differences in temperament between the Deep and Upper South. These differences, particularly at first, were important. “In terms of immediate progress toward desegregation in the South,” noted Numan Bartley, “there was precious little to choose between the complex machinations of upper South states and the bellicose interposition of Virginia and the Deep South. But in terms of the future of the Brown decision, the difference was considerable. States of the upper South, with the exception of Virginia, accepted the validity of the Supreme Court decree and aimed to evade its consequences; Deep South states refused to accede any legitimacy to the decision.” Prior to the Kennedy presidency, this division “helped to keep alive the principle of Brown v. Board of Education in the South.” From 1955 to 1968 the Supreme Court remained largely inactive in school desegregation.

We Are the World: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Use of Foreign Sources of Law

2014 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 891-913
Author(s):  
Ryan C. Black ◽  
Ryan J. Owens ◽  
Jennifer L. Brookhart
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Judicial Politics ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
The World ◽  
The U.S

The United States Supreme Court recently employed foreign legal sources to interpret U.S. law, provoking widespread political and legal controversy. Scholars have yet to examine systematically the conditions under which justices cite foreign law, however. Applying theoretical approaches from international relations and judicial politics scholarship, we search every Supreme Court opinion between 1953 and 2009 for references to foreign law. Justices strategically reference foreign law to prop up their most controversial opinions. They also borrow law from countries whose domestic political institutions are viewed as legitimate; and, surprisingly, conservatives are as likely as liberals to cite foreign law. These findings add important information to the discussion over citing foreign law, and highlight how geopolitical context influences domestic legal policy.

Early Evidence of Cross-Racial Mobilization: White Candidates and Black Voters in the U.S. South 1940–1970

2020 ◽  
pp. 45-79
Author(s):  
Loren Collingwood
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Black Belt ◽  
Deep South ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Supreme Court Ruling ◽  
Senate Election ◽  
Rapid Deployment ◽  
Black Voters ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 2 examines the origins of cross-racial mobilization in the U.S. South between white/Anglo candidates and black voters. The author examines the 1950 U.S. Senate election in Florida between Claude Pepper and George Smathers, identifying the Smith v. Allwright Supreme Court ruling as a critical juncture leading to rapid deployment of cross-racial mobilization across the South. In particular, Claude Pepper covertly mobilized black Floridians by funding a black-run get-out-the-vote operation. The chapter argues that Pepper’s efforts dramatically increased black political participation. Relying on a candidate-level dataset across the U.S. South from the 1940s to the 1970s, the chapter then shows how cross-racial appeals also increased after the Civil Rights reforms of the mid-1960s, that white candidates from the Black Belt were much slower to adopt cross-racial mobilization tactics, and that white candidates mobilized blacks significantly more in the Peripheral South than in the Deep South. Finally, the chapter shows that increasing black registration likely leads to increased cross-racial mobilization.

The Supreme Court Decision Making Process

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Political Issues ◽  
Separated Powers ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. Supreme Court is but one of three political institutions within the structure of the U.S. federal government. Within this system of separated powers it rules on the constitutionality of some of the nation’s most important legal and political issues. In making such decisions, the nation’s highest court may be considered the most powerful of the three branches of the U.S. federal government. Understanding this process will allow scholars, students of the Court, and Court watchers alike to gain a better understanding of the way in which the justices conduct their business and to come to terms with some of the most important legal and political decisions in our nation’s history. Combining a theoretical account of Supreme Court decision-making with an examination of its internal decision-making process illuminates this opaque institution.

A Black Political Insurgency in the Deep South

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sid Bedingfield
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Jim Crow ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Organization ◽  
Deep South ◽  
National Convention ◽  
First Time ◽  
The U.S

This chapter chronicles the role of McCray and his newspaper in the NAACP’s battle against the all-white Democratic Party in South Carolina. In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Smith v. Allwright, which outlawed race-based party membership rules, white Democrats in the state erected new barriers to black participation in Democratic Party politics. In response, McCray and his allies used his newspaper to launch an insurgent political organization, the Progressive Democratic Party, which took its fight against the state’s white Democrats all the way to the national convention in Chicago in July. After three years of legal and political battle, McCray and the NAACP managed to overthrow the all-white primary in South Carolina. In August 1948, black South Carolinians voted in a Democratic Party primary for the first time since the rise of Jim Crow rule in the state in the 1890s.

Antitrust: U.S. Supreme Court Affirms FTC Jurisdiction but Vacates Scope of Analysis on CDA Policy

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-198
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Zakhary
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Trade Commission ◽  
Ninth Circuit ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Antitrust Analysis ◽  
Business Financing ◽  
The U.S

In California Dental Association v. FTC, 119 S. Ct. 1604 (1999), the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that a nonprofit affiliation of dentists violated section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 15 U.S.C.A. § 45 (1998), which prohibits unfair competition. The Court examined two issues: (1) the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) jurisdiction over the California Dental Association (CDA); and (2) the proper scope of antitrust analysis. The Court unanimously held that CDA was subject to FTC's jurisdiction, but split 5-4 in its finding that the district court's use of abbreviated rule-of-reason analysis was inappropriate.CDA is a voluntary, nonprofit association of local dental societies. It boasts approximately 19,000 members, who constitute roughly threequarters of the dentists practicing in California. Although a nonprofit, CDA includes for-profit subsidiaries that financially benefit CDA members. CDA gives its members access to insurance and business financing, and lobbies and litigates on their behalf. Members also benefit from CDA marketing and public relations campaigns.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document