Supreme Court Interpretations of the 14th and 15th
Amendments after the Civil War in the 19th Century
Source: www.caselaw.findlaw.com -- https://supreme.justia.com -- www.oyez.org
Note 1: The SC in the late 19th Century interprets the 14th and 15th amendments “narrowly” or very
conservatively---which allows for the development, based on the various SC rulings, of a Jim Crow
South---Victory for the “Redeemers”/White Supremacists-Herrenvolk Democracy—These ideas
eventually during the later 19th and early 20th century begin to spread to the Mid-West and Far
West where distinctions are made concerning not only African-Americans, but the Native
Americans (denied US Citizenship until 1924), Asian-Americans, and Hispanic Americans---and
Women of Course.
Note 2: Ideas that begin to appear in the Post Civil War America/World:
Scientific Racism, Social Darwinism, Gospel of Wealth, White Man’s Burden, Imperialism,
American Indian Wars/Reconstruction of the West, Global Capitalism and the idea that in an
Industrial World---war and conflict produce profit, Libertarian Democracy, and The 2nd Scientific
Enlightenment
1
Slaughterhouse Cases, 1873
The Supreme Court in the first ruling concerning the 14th Amendments “citizenship” and “incorporationPrivileges and Immunities” clause----rules narrowly---stating, “ There is a clear distinction between
being a citizen of the USA and being the citizen of a State.” Also--- “That the Privileges and
Immunities protected by the Bill of Rights and limiting the actions of the Federal Government do
not necessarily RESTRICT THE STATE GOVERNMENTS. In essence: the 14th amendments P&I clause only
protects a narrow set of National rights thus the states free to restrict liberties as they wish---Substantive
Due Process****—is created—that there are a few/some rights fundamental and protected and others that
are not…. Although this is a conservative ruling—and one that limits the interpretation of the 14th
Amendment---it becomes the vehicle for courts in the future to be “active” in that they begin to “list” and
“create” the “fundamental rights” that are protected---which changes over time and with the subject being
discussed 
2
Minor v. Happersett, 1875
Women are declared as US Citizens---however---Voting is not a guaranteed right for All US Citizens--works off of the Slaughterhouse idea of “separate State and US Citizenship” ---and declares that voting is a
State Right and that the States have the power to decide who and who cannot vote---within the
framework of the 14th and 15th amendments---e.g., (Men, over 21 years of Age, and Citizens of the State)
However, this also allows for Wyoming to be the first State in 1869 to allow women to vote in State
Elections 
3
US V. REESE, 1876
A voting discrimination case which allows states to establish independent standards of voter eligibility;
such as—Literacy, Poll Taxes, Grandfather Clauses, and certain residency requirements----THE RIGHT
TO VOTE IS NOT GUARANTEED BY THE 15TH AMENDMENT---it just cannot be shown to be denied
“due to race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
4
US v. Cruikshank, 1876
Overturned the Conviction of men who murdered over 300 black men in Colfax, Louisiana (see
Reconstruction events) ---Makes clear the distinction between State and Federal Government
responsibilities in that it ruled that it was a States responsibility—jurisdiction—to protect its
citizens from Murder,etc---and if the State does not---it is outside the jurisdiction of the Federal
Government to do so--- again failing to incorporate the right of Assembly and to keep and bear
arms---those that were murdered were part of the black Louisiana guard who were protecting a
courthouse where blacks were voting in the 1872 election. Charges were brought against these men
based on the Enforcement Act of 1870—which prohibited two or more people from conspiring to deprive
anyone of their Constitutional rights—specifically the men were charged with violation of the black
men’s 1st Amendment right to Freely Assemble & their 2nd Amendment right to Keep and Bear Arms.
The SC ruled that the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th
Amendment only applies to actions of “State Government” NOT BY
INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS***
It states further---THAT THE 2ND AMENDMENT DOES NOT GRANT ANYONE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
(basis today for states and cities to restrict gun ownership)***--the 2nd amendment is not incorporated—
more recently there have been some challenges—the Heller Case for further research.
5
Pace v. Alabama, 1883
States could ban inter-racial relationships MISCEGENATION--as long as whites and blacks are punished
in equal measure. Prevented inter racial marriage and ANY relationship (sexually) of any kind--Not overturned until the “Loving” case in Virginia in the late 1960s.
6
US v. Harris, 1883 (sometimes referred to as the Ku Klux Case)
Overturned a conviction for murder—that occurred in Tennessee—and of an assault of 4 others—
who were removed from the jail by the Sheriff and 19 others (a gang) and these black men (5) one
was murdered by the gang and the others beaten severely.
The SC ruled that it was unconstitutional for the Federal Government to penalize crimes such as assault
and Murder. Only local Governments have the power to penalize these crimes (Cruikshank
interpretation) The Enforcement Act (section 2) of 1871 is declared unconstitutional on the theory that
an Act to enforce the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment applied only to STATE ACTION--not State Inaction (not protecting people from the KKK—if the State does not act the Federal Govt cannot
step in to act)
7
Civil Rights Cases, 1883
Rules the Civil Rights Act of 1875 (guaranteed African-Americans equal treatment in public
accommodations, public transportation, and to prohibit exclusion from Jury Service) Unconstitutional
because-although the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits discrimination by the
State and Local Governments ---it does NOT GIVE the Federal Government the POWER TO outlaw
ACTS of Individual/Private Discrimination. And notes further that the 13th amendment may have
ended slavery it did not prohibit racial discrimination.
8
Elk v. Wilkins, 1884
The SC ruled on the 14th Amendments definition of Citizenship.
The SC rules that American Indians [some tribes] are not Citizens of the USA because although
they were born in the USA---they were under the jurisdiction of their “independent tribe” and not
“subject to the jurisdiction of the United States Government at birth.”
Many American Indians do not receive their US citizenship until 1924 by act of Congress.
9
Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896
Upheld the Constitutionality of State Laws that REQUIRED racial segregation in public facilities under the
doctrine of “separate but equal.” Not overturned until the 1954 Brown SC ruling.
The SC rejected the idea that “separate was inherently unequal and a violation of the 14th
amendment.”
This case is the basis for the legality of the Segregated Jim Crow South—and takes the final exclusion
away in discrimination----now even state governments could be discriminatory.
10
US v. Wong Kim Ark, 1898
This case is THE SC CASE on citizenship--Wong Kim Ark, a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his
birth, were subjects of the Emperor of China, but had a permanent domicile and residence in the United
States, and were not employed by the Government of China in any diplomatic capacity. This child, Wong
Kim Ark---based on the 1st clause of the 14th amendment is by birth a citizen of the United States of
America. This established the concept of Jus soli [Birthright Citizenship]—and invalidated the
citizenship concept of jus sanguinis—inheriting citizenship based on the Parent’s citizenhip.****