Search results

@Ricardolindo Did you take a look at that article? It's quite interesting because it shows that the idea that anti-miscegenation laws were compatible with the US Constitution was not universal in the initial couple of decades after the adoption of the 14th Amendment. There's also this post by a...

There's also this article about this topic from 1995, but the article above is much more detailed: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1353&context=roundtable

An additional article by this author about this topic (though you might not like that he's arguing against SCOTUS recognition of same-sex marriage while arguing in favor of the result in Loving): https://lawliberty.org/same-sex-unions-assumed-historical-facts-and-interracial-marriage/

Though their specific understanding of the 14th Amendment was not universal: https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1992&context=hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly But it was originally understood that if anything in the 14th Amendment nullifies anti-miscegenation...

Yes, most likely. Unless of course there is a massive increase in the number of Demoratic-appointed SCOTUS Justices in 1896 relative to 1883, in which case this alt-Pace ruling could also eventually get overturned by SCOTUS.

So, it looks like white Southerners will resort to vigilante lynchings to solve any interracial dating problems in their states in this TL for at least the next several decades; how sad and goddamn-awful! :( I wonder if the Western US will adopt a similar approach. Westerners struck me as being...

This academic article by David Upham is my source for all of this, BTW: https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1992&context=hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly

It's worth noting that all Northern US states other than Indiana had already abolished their anti-miscegenation laws by 1887, though. And even then, there was a serious lack of enforcement of these laws in the Northern US between 1868 and 1887, other than possibly in Indiana.

What if the US Supreme Court would have decided the 1883 case Pace v. Alabama differently? In real life, the US Supreme Court unanimously said back then that anti-miscegenation laws did not violate the US Constitution's 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause because both whites and blacks are...