US v Cruikshank: the Gateway Decision of Violence

The Colfax, Louisiana massacre of 1873 was a dark day in human history. The heavily contested gubernatorial election of Louisiana in 1872 had sparked a wave of intense violence, as both the Republican and Democratic parties had declared themselves the winners. When the Republicans attempted to occupy the government buildings (as, most likely, they were the actual winners), an armed mob of nearly 200 ex-confederates attacked them and their black militia defenders. The largely untrained black militiamen were no match for the ex-Confederates; prisoners were taken, then shot, until between 70 and 150 black men were dead.

9 of the murderers were charged (somehow) in the months after Colfax, and were brought to court. After multiple mistrials, and some very questionable juries, the trial eventually made its way through the appeals process to the Supreme Court, and was hear as US v Cruikshank. The trial was a disaster, by my reckoning. Reading the decision, which was given in 1875, shows exactly how desperate a position blacks in the south were in. The court's decision involved the Enforcement act of 1870, which may need some explaining.

The Enforcement Act of 1870 was more or less ratified exclusively to prevent the kind of violence that was sweeping the south, as white men banded together in semi-formal groups (like the Ku Klux Klan) to stomp on the rights of freed blacks. It gave the federal government the ability to respond (through litigation and more) to “actors” who attempted to impede the suffrage of anyone (in this particular case, black males). The Enforcement Act had been hard fought through the House and Senate, but ultimately had been forced through by the Republicans.

The wording of the Enforcement Act was what affected the court's decision the most. The court decided that, while the Enforcement Act could legally protect the suffrage of black males from states attempting to disfranchise them, it did not give the federal government the power to protect blacks from individual violence, or violence from non state-funded entities. It also established that the second amendment of the US Constitution was entirely added to curb federal power (which is still an argument made to this day, though I wonder how many people know where this political “sacred cow” comes from?).

This effectively nullified the powers of the Enforcement Act, to the point where it was totally pointless. With the death of federal protection for black voters, the floodgates were opened for the ultraviolence that would follow for black republicans (and white republicans, but to a much lesser extent). The KKK, the Red Shirts, and the White Line led a reign of terror throughout the south, and with the help of Jim Crow laws, were able to suppress black voting for the rest of the 19^th century.

After reading about reconstruction, and about “reclamation”, this court decision seems to fit exactly within the narrative. The strange thing, perhaps, is that 8 of the sitting Justices of the Supreme Court had been appointed by Republicans; the one abstaining vote was from the lone democrat. It is clear that the ex Confederates of the South were intent on keeping the status-quo in their states, and were more than willing to manipulate the Union systems to have their way. The Union, on the other hand, seemed to be tired of the constant conflict, and gave up. Perhaps they thought that the Civil War should have stopped things, but is it really possible to force someone to change their mind? Perhaps, through victory, the Union was able to force its politics on the south, but real cultural change cannot, in my opinion, come through violence. But who am I?

US v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875). http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/92/542/case.html Accessed 4/29/13