Isabella Carter
While the US Constitution does not explicitly mention race, colour, or black and white, it does refer to slavery and the infamous three-fifths clause, which counted slaves as three-fifths of a person. This clause has been criticised as evidence of the racist underpinnings of the Constitution, which, despite granting rights and privileges to White Americans, failed to protect Black Americans from a century of racial segregation, discrimination, persecution, and hatred. Amendments to the Constitution, such as the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, have since granted Black people legal protections and voting rights, but the legacy of racism and the struggle for equality persist.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Direct references to black people | None |
| Direct references to race | None |
| Direct references to colour | None |
| Direct references to slavery | None |
| Direct references to slaves | None |
| Circumlocutions used to refer to slaves | "person held to service or labor" and "such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit" |
| The Constitution's stance on black slavery | Constitutional status granted to black slavery |
| The 13th Amendment's impact | Prohibited slavery anywhere in the United States |
| The 14th Amendment's impact | Guaranteed citizenship |
| The 15th Amendment's impact | Granted African American men the right to vote |
| The 15th Amendment's reference to race and colour | Used to secure the right of all citizens to vote |
| The Constitution's view of black people | Considered less than human |
| The Constitution's view of white people | Granted rights, privileges, and immunities to White Americans |
Explore related products
$9.99 $9.99
What You'll Learn
The absence of the words 'black', 'white', 'slave', and 'slavery' in the Constitution
The US Constitution, in its original form, did not contain the words "black", "white", "slave", or "slavery" within its text. This absence of explicit terminology is notable given the centrality of slavery in American society at the time. While the Constitution did not directly mention these terms, it did address slavery through indirect and circumlocutory phrases.
The omission of explicit references to slavery and race in the Constitution can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, the framers of the Constitution deliberately avoided using direct language about slavery to sidestep moral confrontation while preserving the institution. They employed euphemisms such as "person held to service or labour" instead of "slave". This reflected their attempt to navigate the complex political landscape of the time, prioritizing political unity over immediate abolition.
Secondly, the framers held conflicting views on slavery, with some northern states advocating for freedom and equality, while southern states accommodated slavery in their bills of rights. This stark contrast made it challenging to craft a unified document, and the framers chose to omit a direct mention of slavery to avoid conflict. Additionally, many of the drafters believed that slavery would eventually die out due to declining crop productivity, which influenced their decision to not explicitly address it in the Constitution.
Despite the absence of these terms, the Constitution did address American slavery in at least five of its provisions and indirectly protected the institution in other sections. For example, the Fugitive Slave Clause required states to return fugitive slaves, and the Slave Trade Clause prohibited federal interference with the international slave trade for twenty years. These clauses ensured that slavery remained a national issue embedded in American governance.
The absence of explicit references to race and slavery in the Constitution stood in stark contrast to the widespread racism and existence of black slavery in American society. This disjunction between the written Constitution and societal reality has been a subject of debate and interpretation. While some viewed it as an attempt to improve society by omitting ugly truths, others criticized it as a failure to accurately portray the state of the nation.
Goals for a Nation: Preamble Aspirations and Ambitions
You may want to see also
The three-fifths clause
The Three-Fifths Compromise, or the "three-fifths clause", was a compromise reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. It concerned the inclusion of slaves in a state's total population. This count would determine the number of seats in the House of Representatives, the number of electoral votes each state would be allocated, and how much money the states would pay in taxes.
Slaveholding states wanted their entire population to be counted to determine the number of Representatives they could elect and send to Congress. Free states, on the other hand, wanted to exclude the counting of slave populations in slave states, since those slaves had no voting rights. The compromise counted three-fifths of each state's slave population toward that state's total population for the purpose of apportioning the House of Representatives. This gave the Southern states more power in the House relative to the Northern states.
The three-fifths ratio originated with an amendment proposed to the Articles of Confederation on April 18, 1783. The amendment changed the basis for determining the wealth of each state, and hence its tax obligations, from real estate to population, as a measure of ability to produce wealth. The proposal suggested that taxes "shall be supplied by the several colonies in proportion to the number of inhabitants of every age, sex, and quality, except Indians not paying taxes".
The Three-Fifths Compromise is part of Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution. This clause was superseded and explicitly repealed by Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868.
The Three-Fifths Compromise has been criticised for relegating Black people to "three-fifths of a person" status. However, some have argued that this interpretation is false and that the Constitution does not use the phrase "three-fifths of a person". Instead, it states that representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the states according to their respective numbers, which would be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding untaxed Indians, three-fifths of all other persons. The "'other persons' referred to slaves.
Due Process Rights: What the Constitution Really Guarantees
You may want to see also
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments
The 13th Amendment
The 13th Amendment, passed in 1865, made slavery illegal and prohibited it throughout the United States. This amendment was the first time the word "slavery" was included in the Constitution. With the abolition of slavery, Black people who had been enslaved gained freedom and new rights to control their labour, bodies, and time.
The 14th Amendment
The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, affirmed the rights of all citizens, including former slaves. It stated that everyone born in the United States was an American citizen and guaranteed their rights to "life, liberty, and property." This amendment also introduced the first mention of gender in the Constitution, specifying that male citizens over 21 years old had the right to vote.
The 15th Amendment
The 15th Amendment, ratified in 1870, focused on voting rights. It affirmed that the right to vote "shall not be denied...on account of race." The words "race" and "colour" were used in this amendment to ensure that all citizens, regardless of race, had the right to vote. However, it is important to note that this amendment did not include women, and the insertion of the word "male" presented new challenges for women's rights activists.
While these amendments were significant steps towards equality, the enforcement of these rights for Black Americans faced challenges. Despite the legal protections granted by these amendments, southern and border states began restricting the liberties of Black people, and the Supreme Court's decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) undermined these protections by legitimizing Jim Crow laws, which enforced segregation and discrimination.
Civil Servants: Sworn to Protect the Constitution?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$9.99 $9.99
The Supreme Court's Plessy v. Ferguson case
Plessy v. Ferguson was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1896 that ruled racial segregation laws did not violate the U.S. Constitution as long as the facilities for each race were equal in quality. This became known as the "separate but equal" doctrine. The case began in 1892 when Homer Plessy, a mixed-race man, deliberately boarded a whites-only train car in New Orleans, violating Louisiana's Separate Car Act of 1890. This Act required "equal, but separate" railroad accommodations for white and Black passengers. Plessy was charged under the Act, and his lawyers argued that the charges should be dismissed as the Act denied him his rights under the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, which provided for equal treatment under the law.
The judge, John Howard Ferguson, ruled against Plessy, stating that Louisiana could regulate railroad companies within its boundaries. Plessy then petitioned the Louisiana Supreme Court, which issued a temporary writ of prohibition and reviewed the case, ultimately upholding Judge Ferguson's ruling. Plessy's criminal trial went ahead in 1897, and he changed his plea to "guilty," opting to pay a $25 fine.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson upheld Louisiana's Jim Crow law, stating that laws providing for ""separate but equal" facilities for whites and Blacks were consistent with the Constitution. The Court's majority opinion, delivered by Justice Henry Brown, argued that enforced separation of the races did not imply inferiority and that social prejudice could not be overcome by legislation. This ruling legitimized state laws establishing racial segregation and erased legislative achievements won during the Reconstruction Era.
The Plessy v. Ferguson decision was never explicitly overruled by the Supreme Court, but it was effectively nullified by later rulings, such as Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which rejected the "separate but equal" doctrine in public education, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited legal segregation.
McCulloch v Maryland: The Principle of Federal Supremacy
You may want to see also
The role of the media in perpetuating racism
Although the words "black", "white", "race", or "colour" are not explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution, the infamous "three-fifths clause" in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, is widely interpreted as evidence of the racist underpinnings of the document. This clause, which states that "three-fifths of all other persons" should be counted in addition to "all free persons", was a reference to slaves, who were predominantly Black. This provision was a compromise between Southern and Northern states over how slaves should be counted for the purpose of representation.
The media has played a significant role in perpetuating racism, both historically and in the present day. During the era of Jim Crow laws, which legalized racial segregation in the Southern United States, the mass media often published inflammatory articles about "black criminals", contributing to the violence and intimidation used to enforce the racial hierarchy.
In the present day, implicit bias and structural racism continue to pervade the media. According to Tzun, "the root of Western media is white supremacy", and racial stereotypes are repeatedly perpetuated on television and in major news institutions. Ricardo Torres-Cortez, a journalist, notes that even respected newspapers like "The New York Times" have used racist language in the past. The impact of these biases can be far-reaching, influencing which stories are told and which voices are elevated.
However, the media can also play a positive role in challenging racism. Ashton Ridley, a radio manager, believes that radio can be a useful medium for tackling issues of race, as the personal connection with the speaker can encourage listeners to engage in difficult conversations with those close to them. By providing a platform for diverse voices and perspectives, the media can help to drive honest discussions about racism and encourage people to confront their biases.
Magic Kills: Powering Up with Every Enemy Defeat
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No, the original US Constitution does not mention black people, or refer to them by any other terms.
The Constitution does not refer to black people or slavery directly, but it does include the "three-fifths clause", which is considered to give constitutional status to black slavery.
The "three-fifths clause" is Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution, which states: "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States... according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons... three-fifths of all other persons."
The absence of explicit references to race in the Constitution has been interpreted as an attempt to create a document that improves society, rather than simply reflecting its current state. However, it is also a result of widespread racism among Americans at the time.
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, passed after the Civil War, were key to addressing racial inequality. The 13th Amendment prohibited slavery, the 14th granted citizenship to black people, and the 15th granted black men the right to vote.
