Civil Rights or Civil Wrongs?

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Anthony Okechukwu Azuwike
{"title":"Civil Rights or Civil Wrongs?","authors":"Anthony Okechukwu Azuwike","doi":"10.1163/15718115-bja10118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAlthough the Declaration of Independence stated that “[a]ll men are created equal,” due to the institution of slavery, this statement was not to be grounded in law in the U.S until after the Civil War. Often, American blacks looked to the courts to protect important social values and when the courts ruled in favor, there was always a backlash and resistance to judicial fiat. This paper makes a historical analysis of the South’s response to judicial social change. For instance, when Brown v. Board of Education of Tepeka was decided in 1954, school boards in portions of the country actively resisted the court mandated school integration. Thus, the paper argues that social change should be a gradual process and not a forced enterprise by the courts or indeed, any governmental structure since an assertive judiciary can spark a political and cultural backlash that may hurt, more than help, progressive values.","PeriodicalId":44103,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Minority and Group Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718115-bja10118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although the Declaration of Independence stated that “[a]ll men are created equal,” due to the institution of slavery, this statement was not to be grounded in law in the U.S until after the Civil War. Often, American blacks looked to the courts to protect important social values and when the courts ruled in favor, there was always a backlash and resistance to judicial fiat. This paper makes a historical analysis of the South’s response to judicial social change. For instance, when Brown v. Board of Education of Tepeka was decided in 1954, school boards in portions of the country actively resisted the court mandated school integration. Thus, the paper argues that social change should be a gradual process and not a forced enterprise by the courts or indeed, any governmental structure since an assertive judiciary can spark a political and cultural backlash that may hurt, more than help, progressive values.
民事权利还是民事错误?
尽管《独立宣言》指出,由于奴隶制制度,“人人生而平等”,但这一说法直到南北战争后才在美国成为法律依据。通常,美国黑人希望法院保护重要的社会价值观,当法院做出有利于他们的裁决时,总会有人对司法法令表示强烈反对和抵制。本文对南方对司法社会变革的反应进行了历史分析。例如,当布朗诉特佩卡教育委员会案于1954年作出裁决时,该国部分地区的学校董事会积极抵制法院规定的学校整合。因此,该论文认为,社会变革应该是一个渐进的过程,而不是法院或任何政府结构强迫的事业,因为自信的司法机构可能会引发政治和文化反弹,这可能会伤害而不是帮助进步价值观。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信