SSRN Home Search and Download Papers Browse Abstract and Paper Submission Subscribe to Networks View Briefcase Top Papers Top Authors Top Institutions

 

Abstract

 
 

Footnotes (333)

Beta

 


 


Download | Share | Email | Add to Briefcase | Buy Hard Copy

The Tyranny of the Minority: Jim Crow and the Counter-Majoritarian Difficulty

Gabriel J. Chin
University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law; University of Arizona School of Government and Public Policy

Randy Wagner
University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law



Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, Vol. 43, p. 65
Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 07-03

Abstract:     
When analyzing the consequences of and remedies for discrimination against African Americans, courts and scholars characterize African Americans as a minority. This Article shows that the traditional approach is wrong: When it mattered, when the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were enacted and for decades after, African Americans were a majority or controlling plurality in the states where most lived. African American-backed majoritarian governments controlled the South after the Civil War; while in power, they enacted strong civil rights laws and created a public education system. These policies were reversed, and segregation imposed, not because African Americans were a minority, destined to lose in the majoritarian political process, but rather through elimination of democratic politics and imposition of minority rule. African Americans and their white allies were stripped of their electoral majority through fraud, violence and illegal disenfranchisement. This Article argues that the most important harm African Americans suffered was something that the law has until now overlooked: Loss of the right to control the governments of several Southern states. This injury means that current African Americans disadvantage likely rests on a constitutional violation; Jim Crow could not have happened had democracy functioned as provided in the Constitution. Consideration of African American majority status also sheds new light on the counter-majoritarian difficulty. In reviewing measures oppressing African Americans, the Court did not have to balance majority rule against minority rights; instead, majority rule and constitutional rights both militated toward invalidation of laws passed by a minority to oppress the majority.

Keywords: segregation, Jim Crow, constitutional law, equal protection, Reconstruction, race

JEL Classifications: K19

Accepted Paper Series

Date posted: February 14, 2007 ; Last revised: March 10, 2008

Suggested Citation

Chin, Gabriel J. and Wagner, Randy, The Tyranny of the Minority: Jim Crow and the Counter-Majoritarian Difficulty. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, Vol. 43, p. 65; Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 07-03. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=963036


Export to: Export Citation What's this?

Contact Information

Gabriel Jackson Chin (Contact Author)
University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law ( email )
P.O. Box 210176
Tucson, AZ 85721-0176
United States
520-626-6004 (Phone)
(520) 621-9140 (Fax)

University of Arizona School of Government and Public Policy ( email )
Tucson, AZ 85721-0108
United States
Randy Wagner
University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law ( email )
1405 NW 136th St
Tucson, AZ 85712
United States
360 8239007 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,947
Downloads: 393
Download Rank: 19,618
Footnotes: 333

© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use  Privacy Policy
This page was served by apollo2 in 0.109 seconds.