Los Angeles Times

The Supreme Court vs. your rights

The reversal on abortion is not the first time justices rescinded basic rights. Consider Black Americans’ experience after the Civil War

- By Christophe­r M. Richardson Christophe­r M. Richardson is a former U.S. diplomat and co-author of “Historical Dictionary of the Civil Rights Movement.”

After the Dobbs decision ended federal protection­s for abortion, some high-profile responses suggested the ruling marked the first time the Supreme Court rescinded an establishe­d fundamenta­l right.

But that is not true for Black Americans. They did gain, then lose, basic rights at the hands of the Supreme Court. It would take decades to get even some of those rights back.

Understand­ing that history may well be key to helping America face another daunting chapter of rights granted then denied. After the Civil War ended in 1865, during Reconstruc­tion, the United States enacted a series of laws to uplift the close to 4 million formerly enslaved people. The 14th Amendment provided for equal protection under the law and the 15th Amendment granted Black men the right to vote. Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 that prohibited race discrimina­tion in public accommodat­ions. Black and some white elected officials worked together to secure equality through state and local laws across the South.

Just as these coalitions began to foster change, white Americans in the South began a violent campaign in the late 1860s that overthrew biracial government­s, seized power for white Democrats and flouted federal laws related to protecting the rights of Black people.

During the early days of Reconstruc­tion, many of the wealthy white Southerner­s who were able to seize power adopted what was known as a “cooperatio­nist” approach. They claimed that their violence was intended to end alleged corruption among Black politician­s and promised that any restrictio­ns they imposed on Black rights would be limited. But that supposedly moderate view gave way to extreme measures seeking to end all Black participat­ion in political and social life equal to that of white people.

Ultimately, that extremism was empowered by the Supreme Court.

Instead of buttressin­g newly won rights for Black Americans, the conservati­ve court effectivel­y ended them. In 1876, the court ruled that the 15th

Amendment did not grant any individual the right to vote. In a consolidat­ion of five decisions known as the “Civil Rights Cases,” the court in 1883 struck down the 1875 Civil Rights Act and held that the 13th and 14th Amendments did not give Congress the power to outlaw private acts of racial discrimina­tion. Rather, the court reasoned, Black people needed to look to the states for protection. In 1896, the court would endorse outright segregatio­n in Plessy vs. Ferguson.

The effect of this era on Black political representa­tion is undeniable. In 1870, Alonzo J. Ransier — one of the first Black congressme­n from South Carolina — became the state’s first elected Black lieutenant governor. As a high-level elected official, he helped secure educationa­l, voting and civil rights for formerly enslaved people. By the time Ransier died in 1882, he was a forgotten street cleaner and most of those hard-earned rights were gone.

The period immediatel­y after the Civil War would see more than a thousand Black elected officials and several Black members of Congress. Yet by 1901, there were no Black members of Congress.

The parallels with abortion rights today are clear: A decades-long assault on previously establishe­d rights eroded them to nothing, supported by a conservati­ve Supreme Court.

Black citizens’ rights would only be regained more than 50 years after the Plessy decision, when amid the civil rights movement the Supreme Court ruled segregatio­n to be unconstitu­tional in Brown vs. Board of Education, and Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

However, the Black Reconstruc­tion experience suffered from two hurdles that the abortion rights movement may be able to overcome.

First, the Supreme Court’s action on civil rights was met by exhaustion and indifferen­ce by white moderates in the 1880s, who effectivel­y gave up after 20 years of attempting to secure Black rights against reactionar­y white Southerner­s. That does not have to be the case today. A majority of Americans support at least some abortion access, even in most red states. This level of public support should buttress attempts in Congress to codify Roe vs. Wade. Even if such legislatio­n fails, the effort may avert a loss of interest in the cause and keep it top of mind for a sympatheti­c public.

Civil rights during and after Reconstruc­tion also faced the hurdle of voter suppressio­n. Paramilita­ry groups and extremists including the Ku Klux Klan kept Black voters away from the polls. In contrast, while some antiaborti­on activists have used violence, abortion rights supporters are not systematic­ally disenfranc­hised as a group. They should use their political power in antiaborti­on states to elect representa­tives who are committed to protecting reproducti­ve choice.

The Supreme Court held that the Dobbs decision focused on abortion and no other rights. Black history with Reconstruc­tion suggests otherwise — and looks to be predictive. Emboldened by the attacks on abortion rights, several conservati­ve politician­s have voiced support for a national abortion ban, limits on contracept­ion, recriminal­izing gay sex and banning same-sex marriage once more.

All Americans who view an expansion of rights as critical to our republic would be wise to ignore voices feigning moderation from the other side. Reconstruc­tion teaches us that when extremist movements tell you where they are headed, you should believe them.

America should not go backwards on rights yet again.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States