From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality

This was required reading for a graduate course in American history. The question that the author posits is: does the Supreme Court actually affect society? Klarman contends that Supreme Court rulings in the 1940s, specifically when dealing with criminal procedure (as opposed to black enfranchisement), had little tangible impact on the lives of African Americans in the South. He cites four cases, Moore v. Dempsey (1923), which dealt with verdicts rendered amid mob pressure, Powell v. Alabama (1932), which dealt with the appointment of adequate counsel for felonies, Norris v. Alabama (1935), which dealt with jury selections, and Brown v. Mississippi (1936), which dealt with confessions obtained using torture. Klarman contends that despite these constitutional safeguard, African American rights were still trampled in the South. He cites numerous "legal loopholes" for circumventing these cases, or in some cases, just blatant disregard. For instance, many times, lawyers were appointed at most a few days before trial, and were unable to adequately prepare. He also cites the reluctance of white lawyers to take on black clients for fear of reprisal, and out of blatant racism. After the Norris ruling, African Americans were usually selected to be in the jury pool, but never on the juries. The use of torture was always suspect, and a jury would almost always take a white sheriffs word over a black mans if he claimed he was tortured. Lynching and mob violence still permeated Southern Courts as well. Klarman maintains that there was a set of "unwritten laws" which governed the South despite the federal rulings of the Supreme Court. Klarman also contends that the Supreme Court even showed hesitance toward their professed principles. Despite passing this legislation, the Supreme Court did not always enforce their decisions. Despite obvious "miscarriages of justice," many felt that even the presence of these rulings-whether enforced or not-was a step in the right direction (although I think many African Americans would probably disagree with this). It is an argument of intention versus actuality. He contends that Supreme Court justices are products of their time and rarely make groundbreaking decisions, instead he contends that justices are "a part of the society that they are trying to transform," and cannot truly step outside of that society. Rather, they can only "go with the flow." And this I believe to be his thesis. He cites public opinion at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Brown v. Board of Education, and that those cases were not truly revolutionary because the "tide" of public opinion was moving in that direction. However, while Klarman denies the existence of tangible gains resulting from these cases, he does not think them futile. Instead, he posits that these cases led to intangible results for the African-American community. Namely, it gave African Americans confidence that the oppressive system in which they lived could be chan

This work is full of interesting, insightful, and provocative ideas that will make readers rethink the impact of the Supreme Court's civil rights decisions. I predict that the revisionist arguments in this masterpiece will some day become the orthodoxy. This book will be read by many future generations of American history and law students.

Having had the opportunity to hear Professor Klarman speak, I knew before reading the book that it would be a great work of scholarship. I was blown away. Meticulously researched, eminently readable, and full of the details necessary to support any conclusions about that troubling time in American history. It's a must read for every law student, historian, and American.

A comprehensive account not just of civil rights legal history, but also the political and social context that Klarman shows were never far in the background of court decisions regarding civil rights. The book doesn't just chronical events, but uses history to test and illustrate theories for why courts decide cases as they do.

Michael J. Klarman's book From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality is the best book written about civil rights in America in quite some time. Klarman's book is one of the few works about the civil rights movement that analyzes the significant change that occurred in racial attitudes during 1900-1954 as well as the movement itself. Klarman's book is a revisionist account that downplays the importance of the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education case. Klarman contends that there would have been a civil rights movement even if the Supreme Court had ruled the other way in Brown. Klarman believes that the conventional history gives court rulings too much credit for effecting change in America. Essentially, Klarman believes that the federal court system is actually very weak and does not affect America much in the long run. Klarman believes, for instance, that the White Court's civil rights rulings during the Progressive Era did nothing to help blacks. Other than the Smith case of 1944, Klarman does not believe that Supreme Court rulings helped black Americans. In the Smith case, Klarman holds that it effectively opened the door for some black participation in Southern politics. A large part of Klarman's book is devoted to debunking the idea that the Brown ruling helped speed the civil rights movement. Klarman holds that the Brown decision did little to inspire blacks to seek redress for racial grievances. He does, however, concede that the media coverage of Brown did help raise consciousness among white folks about racial injustice in the South. Klarman's book is a revisionist account of civil rights history. It is well-written, makes its points well and is backed up by prodigious research. It deserves a wide audience.