A Statute Unparalleled

By GENE NICHOL

July 2 marked the 60th anniversary of the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act – perhaps the most consequential statute in American history – outlawing discrimination in public accommodations and facilities, in education, and in employment. Ironically, the destructive Supreme Court decision in the Trump immunity case was handed down only the day before. History travels in curious directions.

The late Congressman John Lewis, speaking of the impact of the Civil Rights Act at the 50th anniversary of its passage in 2014, recalled:

“A time when people were arrested and taken to jail just for sitting beside each other on a bus. It was against the law for Black and White people to ride in the same taxicab or to stay in the same hotel. People’s homes were bombed, their lives were threatened for taking a drink from the same water fountain. When people say nothing has changed, I say come walk in my shoes.”

The late Ruth Bader Ginsburg similarly reminded:

“When I graduated from law school in 1959 there was no Civil Rights Act. Legal employers were perfectly up front in saying ‘we’re not hiring women’. The usual excuse was ‘we had a woman once and she was dreadful.’ My answer would be, ‘and how many men have you had that didn’t work out.’ The Civil Rights Act (was meant) to stop that.”

No wonder Project 2025 seeks to amend and repeal some of its most important provisions.

The 1964 statute’s enactment, in many ways, stuns today’s reader.

First, there was its ambition. My students no longer expect that legislatures might do something huge, something larger than themselves and their momentary prospects, something nation-defining. Much less taking up what Lyndon Johnson would term “the unending search for justice within our borders.” Or that some lawmakers, or even many, would do so out of obligation, duty – recognizing that personal costs would follow. Another era.

Second, and equally surprising, that lawmakers would sometimes carry out that work on a bi-partisan basis. The Civil Rights Act’s famed 75-day filibuster was broken on a 71-29 vote, 27 Republicans supporting cloture. The bill passed 289-120 in the House, relying heavily on Republicans to overcome the intense opposition of southern Democrats.

Republican Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen of Illinois cast his vote, saying: this Act “must pass if we are to honor the pledges we have made when we took the oath to carry out the Constitution.” And that noble sentiment was uttered only after Lyndon Johnson had pressed his fingers to Dirksen’s chest saying: “Everett, you come with me on this bill and 200 years from now, school children in Illinois will know only two names – Abraham Lincoln and Everett Dirksen.”

The Johnson treatment.

Third, heroic work on the statute’s behalf was, no doubt, done by Johnson, Dirksen, Robert Kennedy and other noted driving political leaders. But many of the most crucial efforts came from folks outside government. Civil rights leaders, of course, led national crusades. But, more surprising, labor unions pressed mightily for passage – the UAW, AFL-CIO, Steelworkers, Packing House Workers, the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters.

And, most amazing, the churches. The massive National Council of Churches, the Synagogue Council of America, the National Catholic Welfare Conference. Sen. Richard Russell (R-Ga.) complained bitterly that segregationists could have sustained the filibuster but for interference from churches back home in folks’ districts.

And finally, there was the Act’s profound moral clarity. President Johnson signed it saying:

“We believe all are created equal. Yet many are denied equality. The reasons for this are deeply embedded in history. But (they) cannot continue. Our Constitution forbids it. The principles of our freedom forbid it. Morality forbids it. And the law I sign tonight forbids it.”

Gene Nichol is Boyd Tinsley Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law and in 2015 started the North Carolina Poverty Research Fund after the UNC Board of Governors closed the state-funded Poverty Center for publishing articles critical of the governor and General Assembly.

From The Progressive Populist, August 15, 2024

Populist.com