Transcripts For CSPAN2 Book Discussion Civil Rights And The

You want to choose wisely. Host breaking in is the name of Joan Biskupics most book, breaking in the rise of Sonia Sotomayor and the politics of justice. And civil rights and the making of the modern american state, Megan Ming Francis examines the Civil Rights Movement and specifically the naacp effect and the american Political Landscape in the early 20th century. This event corded at ucla as an hour. I am going to introduce and again. Weve known each other for quite some time. Youll been it for the professional and personal. On a professional tip, Megan Ming Francis as an assistant professor at the department of Political Science at the university of washington at seattle. She earned her ba in Political Science and economics at Rice University in 2003 and soon after a 2008, francis earned her doctorate in politics at Princeton University where she worked with paul framer, Kelley Mendel Burke and cornell west. She held two distinct postdocs at the university of chicago and Indiana University school of law before joining the faculty at Pepperdine University where she garnered quite the students following with politics and law and society. Francis work at the intersection of american politics, race, constitutional law in history. Shes particularly interested in the construction of rights and citizenship, black political activism and politics of capitalism. Shes the author of civil rights and the making of the modern american state which was published on Cambridge University press. This book argues the naacp plays a pivotal role in the federal court power and criminal procedure and subsequently in civil rights in civil rights by helping the Supreme Court wrestle away jurisdiction for state courts in the 20th century. What i would argue is that kind of conceive of making his work as a kind of deeply archival projects that in mind that the historian linda komars recent work access a radical reframing tulia logically to start earlier. In acting as a counterbalance the civil rights only the 1960s and 1970s. That is something makeable talk more about in her talk. She is currently on work in a second book project that examines the rule of the criminal Justice System and rebuilding a southern political and economic power after the civil war. On a personal level i have no i have known they can from us 15 years, which seems really shocking to say. We graduated from rice together. After a few years on opposite sides of the campus. We worked alongside each other in various facets of student activism including campus recruitment and retention, campus programming, algae btu quality and advanced diversity where i will say that megan served as president of advancing diversity the senior year. We both counterintuitive the usual route to success and probably to her parents initial dismay chose to pursue a phd is nothing but a law school or med school and a respected Ivy League Institutions often meeting in the Meeting Point between new haven and princeton, new york city often over the years to regroup, direct and nurture each other through the process. After at least five years and five winters in the east coast, and we both ended up in sunny los angeles and per usual guided through the first initial years of the tenuretrack. Im a fifthyear ucla, i can say in equivocally have a large measure of my success jamaicans friendship these past 13 plus years and specifically her constant support which is the interior would catch up on santa monica. It is with great pleasure that i introduce her for this talk today. [applause] that was wonderful. All right. Let me set my watch so i dont go over like i do with my classes. So thank you so much for coming in hearing me speak between the hour of noon and 1 00 p. M. About my book project. First, i want to thank the senator for the invitation to talk today about my book. I really appreciate it. It is especially great to be at ucla where i think a lot of exciting work around africanamerican studies is actually being done and its a really exciting place. One of the most exciting places in the country. It is also why take a really great place for me to give a talk for two other reasons. One that i used to live in l. A. But i still consider it home. I just left in june and i have his son and a very long time. It makes me very happy to be here. Second because i have a number of friends in the l. A. Area and in particular i want to thank uri for the very generous introduction. I met him 15 years ago as a wideeyed freshman, pulling all nighters in the library there. And somehow we both went to soul crushing Ivy League Institutions and media in princeton and we meet as and we need is to set in new york fabulous dinners to disguise the jury process at the graduate school process. Somehow in 2010, we both moved to los angeles together. So he has seen me through the process in the book more than anybody else. Do we both dont have husbands, he has probably come up closest to me to be one in terms of support. So thank you. Talking about her Horror Stories that we started to talk about my book, which sounds so very weird to me. It is my book is called civil rights in the making. My gosh, where is my clicker . It is called civil rights and the making of the modern american state. We are going to do this and prompts everybody. It is called civil rights and the making of the modern american state. I want to start off by saying that an academic different names inspire us to write and research. For me, it is the retelling of stories that we think we already know, but we dont really intelligent man and retelling them in different ways. What i want to do is begin i want to begin with the story. Its a story by transformative civil rights struggle waged by the naacp and the landmark Supreme Court decision that resulted from that. The struggle which began before the case was heard in the Supreme Court, centered on africanamericans with the citizen right focused on the most blatant forms of the naacp and the Public Campaign that ultimately translated into clinical arguments they delivered before the Supreme Court. Violation of the 14th amendment, the naacp Legal Defense team argued africanamericans were denied their Constitutional Rights. The Supreme Court agreed and handed the naacp their greatest legal date react to that point in their history. If the case of jim crow in the south and by doing so enraged by southerners white gave hope while frustrated with the undermining of the citizenship. After the courts decision, one of the leaders throughout and im quoting here, the Supreme Court decision in this notable case he comes one of the milestones in the fight for justice. An achievement that is as important as any event since the signing of the emancipation proclamation, and quote. Moving forward the naacp Supreme Court victory in this case filled the struggle for equal citizenship that define africanamerican politics in the 20th century. More importantly, improve the naacp could reshape the constitutional landscape and it had earned the respect of the highest court in the nation. With this description to be used to describe the landmark victory in browns record, what i am referring to is the legal victory in a case called more beach and see. In the case decided more than 30 years before the infamous brown v. Board decision decided at the Supreme Court and 54, the decision by the Supreme Court constituted a turning point in the judiciarys expansion of its powers and role in criminal procedure. The case involved 12 africanamerican sharecroppers from Phillips County and dark horse sentenced to die by the electric chair. They each received a child that was less than 15 minutes and a corporate occupied eye of menacing mob that threatened the jury if they did not sentence these men to death, the jury would then thomas to bring the jury to defense. Five years after losing the case, the 12 men convicted today they violated the cause he had death sentences for africanamericans had been widely accepted practices ever since the lakeland of slavery. Is the Supreme Court protection and we understand a lot we can put them in the electric chair. We cant have a mob in a courtroom. And early on in the 20th century, these are new types of protection, new ways of the federal government coming into state and state courts and telling them what actually defines what a fair trial is. This marked a turning point of legal discourse about Constitutional Rights due to the naacps ability to get the Supreme Court involved in an unjust criminal court proceeding. After this case from the Supreme Court continued to expand its power press forward in the 20th century and creating new constitutional law and innovative standards of fairness. More v. Debs cir to create a critical moment when the powers of the federal court expanded. Less than a century weve we have gone from a nation with a week judiciary and strong individual state court powers to a country with weaker local control and stronger central state powers. Federal courts are now with questions of civil rights and liberty go to be resolved. S. Arrested and raised a number of questions that cannot yet answer with the available literature on the naacp civil rights and Constitutional Development that i had read in undergrad and also graduate school. I came upon this case early in the graduate studies. So there are three questions that ive been wrestling with over the past 10 years. What explains the margin of the federal court system in the United States in the 20th century, especially in the area of criminal procedure. Why did the Supreme Court in the area of criminal law and perhaps the most important question, can civil rights organizations Impact Development of the american state . Surmises stands, most civil rights scholarship taints the naacp is focused on legal victories. This is a wellworn narrative in the american imagination right now. Today it is the most wellknown Supreme Court case Public Opinion poll after Public Opinion poll reveals this. Many of us who follow civil rights know the naacp was also very active in housing discrimination lawsuits and voter disenfranchisement cases. One of the contemporary lit up a leader of this sentiment, barack obama, while state senators remarked on her radio show, one of the tragedies of the Civil Rights Movement was because the Civil Rights Movement became so focused. I think that there was a tenant need to lose track of the political and Community Organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of power. Along similar lines, Jerry Rosenberg had called to have his belief that they are constrained and unable to bring about significant social change. These arguments i think reflect a perspective of many in science and history that the Civil Rights Movement would have achieved greater success an organization focus more energy on achieving victories or protest or through the political process instead of through court. First i argue the naacp campaign against lynching marks the long battle of the Civil Rights Movement not the education vote. And second, bottom of change shapes formation and that the Political Development needs to decenter the role of elite state actors. And third i argue the naacp is politized and active at a federal level at a time when previo previous say they were inactive. Using the antilynching camp pain the naacp played an important right in the Civil Rights Movement. The legislative branches of the government are not willing to go. Finally, i argue they failed to give protection and the naacp moved the efforts to the Supreme Court and took up moore and dempsey. This book is about wellestablished narratives that are then reproduced. So, a bit of a critique for the academics in the audience in terms of intervention of my work or where i like to argue my work intervenes. The argument i make and the story i told in the beginning are not likely to be found in the Political Development and science documenting the structure of the 221st century but it should. There is a focus on institutions and scholars have drawn attention to things that have defined the american system of government. Some of the most famous work link to Party Development and social policy formation. I often explain apd to the students. The powers of the presidency and how they exist in 2014 are not how they existed previously. People try to understand how did the presidency expand and federal court build over time. We address what we believe are very important political questions. My traditional approach is in Political Science and i rely on static pictures of politics. We have Big Questions about how institutions form. Despi despite broadening the way authority works, we have overlooked the role that individual and grassroot organizations have played in shaping the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government. It isnt so much they ignored civil rights organizations. Many have investigated Community Level and the impact on the development of the american state in the postworld war ii era. But this scholarship use as top down formation and uses politic for the forming of the domestic right agenda. This perspective has so much power it is often called the cold war civil rights theory and civil right organizations are considered too weak to impact the country. From this perspective, National Security concerns and not civil rights, gave the federal government to the power to protect the laws of the africanamerican americans. The cold war rights set the debate for the last decade. The response of southern injustice and the way legal scholars have narrated the beginning and the ground work of criminal procedure is for example dempsey, the fact that 1 africanamerican men were going to be sentenced to die, of course the Supreme Court had to step in. This is a mischaracter of justice. It falls into line with american democracy and liberalism but i think it incomplete. What about the empath of civil rights organizations before the cold war . It is mostly silent. It is supported by scholarships and africanamerican studies and provided a narrative of political activism and National Politics that exist in the bound of reconstruction in the period post1950s. The period in the middle, the timespan my book is interested in, is a scene the africanamericans were seen in the national seen. The freedom circle follows along the lines after the abolition of slavery and then reconstruction came about where africanamericans were part of the political system but soon they were stripped of their political, economic and social rights. Racist jim crow laws were in introduced and unable to bear it anymore africanamericans in the south took to the streets and lynch counters and protested and finally forced the National Government to Pay Attention to their plight. For to almost 75 year period before africanamericans are assumed to be inward to promote interest to institutions and churches and other organizations. Many africanamericans resisted jim crow at the local and state level not but the national level. Political scientist have accepted this narrative for the most part so i think these strands are reinforcing and changes in the development of the American Space are contributed to overarching structures. Africanamericans by default are not considered important enough to rest on the narrative of the Political Development and science in the 21st century. Africanamericans were sidelines in politics in the first half so they had no role in shaping state development during this period. But africanamerican politics and Constitutional Development create as blind spot that stop as very important moment in the construction of the american state. It is this silence i think we should probe deeper. I propose a new understanding of politics and Constitutional Development. For the scholarship on africanamericans is on one side and Political Science and the literature on Joan Biskupics<\/a> most book, breaking in the rise of Sonia Sotomayor<\/a> and the politics of justice. And civil rights and the making of the modern american state, Megan Ming Francis<\/a> examines the Civil Rights Movement<\/a> and specifically the naacp effect and the american Political Landscape<\/a> in the early 20th century. This event corded at ucla as an hour. I am going to introduce and again. Weve known each other for quite some time. Youll been it for the professional and personal. On a professional tip, Megan Ming Francis<\/a> as an assistant professor at the department of Political Science<\/a> at the university of washington at seattle. She earned her ba in Political Science<\/a> and economics at Rice University<\/a> in 2003 and soon after a 2008, francis earned her doctorate in politics at Princeton University<\/a> where she worked with paul framer, Kelley Mendel Burke<\/a> and cornell west. She held two distinct postdocs at the university of chicago and Indiana University<\/a> school of law before joining the faculty at Pepperdine University<\/a> where she garnered quite the students following with politics and law and society. Francis work at the intersection of american politics, race, constitutional law in history. Shes particularly interested in the construction of rights and citizenship, black political activism and politics of capitalism. Shes the author of civil rights and the making of the modern american state which was published on Cambridge University<\/a> press. This book argues the naacp plays a pivotal role in the federal court power and criminal procedure and subsequently in civil rights in civil rights by helping the Supreme Court<\/a> wrestle away jurisdiction for state courts in the 20th century. What i would argue is that kind of conceive of making his work as a kind of deeply archival projects that in mind that the historian linda komars recent work access a radical reframing tulia logically to start earlier. In acting as a counterbalance the civil rights only the 1960s and 1970s. That is something makeable talk more about in her talk. She is currently on work in a second book project that examines the rule of the criminal Justice System<\/a> and rebuilding a southern political and economic power after the civil war. On a personal level i have no i have known they can from us 15 years, which seems really shocking to say. We graduated from rice together. After a few years on opposite sides of the campus. We worked alongside each other in various facets of student activism including campus recruitment and retention, campus programming, algae btu quality and advanced diversity where i will say that megan served as president of advancing diversity the senior year. We both counterintuitive the usual route to success and probably to her parents initial dismay chose to pursue a phd is nothing but a law school or med school and a respected Ivy League Institutions<\/a> often meeting in the Meeting Point<\/a> between new haven and princeton, new york city often over the years to regroup, direct and nurture each other through the process. After at least five years and five winters in the east coast, and we both ended up in sunny los angeles and per usual guided through the first initial years of the tenuretrack. Im a fifthyear ucla, i can say in equivocally have a large measure of my success jamaicans friendship these past 13 plus years and specifically her constant support which is the interior would catch up on santa monica. It is with great pleasure that i introduce her for this talk today. [applause] that was wonderful. All right. Let me set my watch so i dont go over like i do with my classes. So thank you so much for coming in hearing me speak between the hour of noon and 1 00 p. M. About my book project. First, i want to thank the senator for the invitation to talk today about my book. I really appreciate it. It is especially great to be at ucla where i think a lot of exciting work around africanamerican studies is actually being done and its a really exciting place. One of the most exciting places in the country. It is also why take a really great place for me to give a talk for two other reasons. One that i used to live in l. A. But i still consider it home. I just left in june and i have his son and a very long time. It makes me very happy to be here. Second because i have a number of friends in the l. A. Area and in particular i want to thank uri for the very generous introduction. I met him 15 years ago as a wideeyed freshman, pulling all nighters in the library there. And somehow we both went to soul crushing Ivy League Institutions<\/a> and media in princeton and we meet as and we need is to set in new york fabulous dinners to disguise the jury process at the graduate school process. Somehow in 2010, we both moved to los angeles together. So he has seen me through the process in the book more than anybody else. Do we both dont have husbands, he has probably come up closest to me to be one in terms of support. So thank you. Talking about her Horror Stories<\/a> that we started to talk about my book, which sounds so very weird to me. It is my book is called civil rights in the making. My gosh, where is my clicker . It is called civil rights and the making of the modern american state. We are going to do this and prompts everybody. It is called civil rights and the making of the modern american state. I want to start off by saying that an academic different names inspire us to write and research. For me, it is the retelling of stories that we think we already know, but we dont really intelligent man and retelling them in different ways. What i want to do is begin i want to begin with the story. Its a story by transformative civil rights struggle waged by the naacp and the landmark Supreme Court<\/a> decision that resulted from that. The struggle which began before the case was heard in the Supreme Court<\/a>, centered on africanamericans with the citizen right focused on the most blatant forms of the naacp and the Public Campaign<\/a> that ultimately translated into clinical arguments they delivered before the Supreme Court<\/a>. Violation of the 14th amendment, the naacp Legal Defense<\/a> team argued africanamericans were denied their Constitutional Rights<\/a>. The Supreme Court<\/a> agreed and handed the naacp their greatest legal date react to that point in their history. If the case of jim crow in the south and by doing so enraged by southerners white gave hope while frustrated with the undermining of the citizenship. After the courts decision, one of the leaders throughout and im quoting here, the Supreme Court<\/a> decision in this notable case he comes one of the milestones in the fight for justice. An achievement that is as important as any event since the signing of the emancipation proclamation, and quote. Moving forward the naacp Supreme Court<\/a> victory in this case filled the struggle for equal citizenship that define africanamerican politics in the 20th century. More importantly, improve the naacp could reshape the constitutional landscape and it had earned the respect of the highest court in the nation. With this description to be used to describe the landmark victory in browns record, what i am referring to is the legal victory in a case called more beach and see. In the case decided more than 30 years before the infamous brown v. Board decision decided at the Supreme Court<\/a> and 54, the decision by the Supreme Court<\/a> constituted a turning point in the judiciarys expansion of its powers and role in criminal procedure. The case involved 12 africanamerican sharecroppers from Phillips County<\/a> and dark horse sentenced to die by the electric chair. They each received a child that was less than 15 minutes and a corporate occupied eye of menacing mob that threatened the jury if they did not sentence these men to death, the jury would then thomas to bring the jury to defense. Five years after losing the case, the 12 men convicted today they violated the cause he had death sentences for africanamericans had been widely accepted practices ever since the lakeland of slavery. Is the Supreme Court<\/a> protection and we understand a lot we can put them in the electric chair. We cant have a mob in a courtroom. And early on in the 20th century, these are new types of protection, new ways of the federal government coming into state and state courts and telling them what actually defines what a fair trial is. This marked a turning point of legal discourse about Constitutional Rights<\/a> due to the naacps ability to get the Supreme Court<\/a> involved in an unjust criminal court proceeding. After this case from the Supreme Court<\/a> continued to expand its power press forward in the 20th century and creating new constitutional law and innovative standards of fairness. More v. Debs cir to create a critical moment when the powers of the federal court expanded. Less than a century weve we have gone from a nation with a week judiciary and strong individual state court powers to a country with weaker local control and stronger central state powers. Federal courts are now with questions of civil rights and liberty go to be resolved. S. Arrested and raised a number of questions that cannot yet answer with the available literature on the naacp civil rights and Constitutional Development<\/a> that i had read in undergrad and also graduate school. I came upon this case early in the graduate studies. So there are three questions that ive been wrestling with over the past 10 years. What explains the margin of the federal court system in the United States<\/a> in the 20th century, especially in the area of criminal procedure. Why did the Supreme Court<\/a> in the area of criminal law and perhaps the most important question, can civil rights organizations Impact Development<\/a> of the american state . Surmises stands, most civil rights scholarship taints the naacp is focused on legal victories. This is a wellworn narrative in the american imagination right now. Today it is the most wellknown Supreme Court<\/a> case Public Opinion<\/a> poll after Public Opinion<\/a> poll reveals this. Many of us who follow civil rights know the naacp was also very active in housing discrimination lawsuits and voter disenfranchisement cases. One of the contemporary lit up a leader of this sentiment, barack obama, while state senators remarked on her radio show, one of the tragedies of the Civil Rights Movement<\/a> was because the Civil Rights Movement<\/a> became so focused. I think that there was a tenant need to lose track of the political and Community Organizing<\/a> activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of power. Along similar lines, Jerry Rosenberg<\/a> had called to have his belief that they are constrained and unable to bring about significant social change. These arguments i think reflect a perspective of many in science and history that the Civil Rights Movement<\/a> would have achieved greater success an organization focus more energy on achieving victories or protest or through the political process instead of through court. First i argue the naacp campaign against lynching marks the long battle of the Civil Rights Movement<\/a> not the education vote. And second, bottom of change shapes formation and that the Political Development<\/a> needs to decenter the role of elite state actors. And third i argue the naacp is politized and active at a federal level at a time when previo previous say they were inactive. Using the antilynching camp pain the naacp played an important right in the Civil Rights Movement<\/a>. The legislative branches of the government are not willing to go. Finally, i argue they failed to give protection and the naacp moved the efforts to the Supreme Court<\/a> and took up moore and dempsey. This book is about wellestablished narratives that are then reproduced. So, a bit of a critique for the academics in the audience in terms of intervention of my work or where i like to argue my work intervenes. The argument i make and the story i told in the beginning are not likely to be found in the Political Development<\/a> and science documenting the structure of the 221st century but it should. There is a focus on institutions and scholars have drawn attention to things that have defined the american system of government. Some of the most famous work link to Party Development<\/a> and social policy formation. I often explain apd to the students. The powers of the presidency and how they exist in 2014 are not how they existed previously. People try to understand how did the presidency expand and federal court build over time. We address what we believe are very important political questions. My traditional approach is in Political Science<\/a> and i rely on static pictures of politics. We have Big Questions<\/a> about how institutions form. Despi despite broadening the way authority works, we have overlooked the role that individual and grassroot organizations have played in shaping the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government. It isnt so much they ignored civil rights organizations. Many have investigated Community Level<\/a> and the impact on the development of the american state in the postworld war ii era. But this scholarship use as top down formation and uses politic for the forming of the domestic right agenda. This perspective has so much power it is often called the cold war civil rights theory and civil right organizations are considered too weak to impact the country. From this perspective, National Security<\/a> concerns and not civil rights, gave the federal government to the power to protect the laws of the africanamerican americans. The cold war rights set the debate for the last decade. The response of southern injustice and the way legal scholars have narrated the beginning and the ground work of criminal procedure is for example dempsey, the fact that 1 africanamerican men were going to be sentenced to die, of course the Supreme Court<\/a> had to step in. This is a mischaracter of justice. It falls into line with american democracy and liberalism but i think it incomplete. What about the empath of civil rights organizations before the cold war . It is mostly silent. It is supported by scholarships and africanamerican studies and provided a narrative of political activism and National Politics<\/a> that exist in the bound of reconstruction in the period post1950s. The period in the middle, the timespan my book is interested in, is a scene the africanamericans were seen in the national seen. The freedom circle follows along the lines after the abolition of slavery and then reconstruction came about where africanamericans were part of the political system but soon they were stripped of their political, economic and social rights. Racist jim crow laws were in introduced and unable to bear it anymore africanamericans in the south took to the streets and lynch counters and protested and finally forced the National Government<\/a> to Pay Attention<\/a> to their plight. For to almost 75 year period before africanamericans are assumed to be inward to promote interest to institutions and churches and other organizations. Many africanamericans resisted jim crow at the local and state level not but the national level. Political scientist have accepted this narrative for the most part so i think these strands are reinforcing and changes in the development of the American Space<\/a> are contributed to overarching structures. Africanamericans by default are not considered important enough to rest on the narrative of the Political Development<\/a> and science in the 21st century. Africanamericans were sidelines in politics in the first half so they had no role in shaping state development during this period. But africanamerican politics and Constitutional Development<\/a> create as blind spot that stop as very important moment in the construction of the american state. It is this silence i think we should probe deeper. I propose a new understanding of politics and Constitutional Development<\/a>. For the scholarship on africanamericans is on one side and Political Science<\/a> and the literature on Political Development<\/a> is on the other and i would like to think my work is in the middle of the debate. It challenges the scholarship and puts them together in a new way. It does this by examining the naacp in the 1st quarter of the 21st century. And also for president s harding and trying to pass an antilynching bill in congress. The broader, theoretical part of the project is a way to think about Political Development<\/a>. The party demonstrates the Important Role<\/a> that civil rights organizations played in the National State<\/a> building projects. By taking a step back and looking at the political and social environment, we will see the role the naacp plays. So that was through the literature review. At this point, i think it is necessary to establish why the naacp put so much of their organizational muscle behind the issue of racial bias. It focuses on the camp pain against violence but it is important to understand why they did so. From the very beginning of the naacp in 1909 lynching and mob violence at the top of the naacp agenda. Racist violence was considered to be the greatest obstacle they faced in the north and south. In 1916, it was said the naacp advancement wasnt radical enough and didnt address labor or housing or other things. One of the naacp explains was all of the American Negro<\/a> wanted was a chance to live without a lynch around his neck. They felt it was necessary to focus on ending lynching so africanamericans could enjoy the benefits of their struggle. So what you see the board image prom 1911 which is the first year the naacp kept minutes every month. Up until 1923, the year that dempsey was decided and the purpose was to compare the frequency that we very much associate with civil rights which is education, labor and voting with issues to criminal justice. So i coded for a number of different words that were related to criminal justice and lynching and racist violence and in education, labor and voting. What i found was really interesting to me in trying to assess watt the naacp actually cared about in the first 1020 years of the organization existing. Criminal justice concerns, and when i say criminal justice i mean concerns about mob and lynching occupied the organizations agenda from the outset. So the naacp was originally formed in response to lynching and mob violence not primarily to pursue the fight of education and equality that would come to be so much of its agenda. In the volume of civil rights and constitutional law there is not one account that detailed at length a theoreticle and political state of the naacps campaign against racist and violence. I think they focus on describing constitutional and civil Rights Development<\/a> and are often incomplete. The organization targeted the executive branch whereby a Civil Rights Program<\/a> or agenda could be entrenched. In 19091916 the naacp was focused on the Public Opinion<\/a> campaign and believed if they made it clear the horrors that africanamericans were facing n south the whites would realize how bad it was. And Woodrow Wilson<\/a> was an important figure to focus on to get his support. What is is interesting is woodrow met with the naacp two names. Two times with johnson in his office and one time over the silent protest down fifth avenue in new york protesting mob violence that happened in st. Louis. This is what the naacp is doing here. And then what they do get from wilson and harding are statements against lynching. It took a lot of letter writing. But wilson made a statement saying there have been many lynches and everyone of them is a blow and no men who loves america and care for her fame, honor and character or who is truly loyal to her institution can justify mob action while the courts of justice are open and the governments of states are ready to deal with their duties. You have individuals like the boys walter white and johnson enix change with wilson and also in exchange with harding. And harding says to make this statement to congress. Congress talks about the barbaric lynching from the banners of a free and ordered representative democracy. The naacp was hoping the head of the nation makes a statement against mob violence and lynching and then americans will follow. And as we know that doesnt happen, right . So also, at the tail end of the harding statement they are focused on maybe if we pass a federal legislation we can protect the lives of africanamericans. So i documented another chapter of the naacp work and it is a Massive Campaign<\/a> to try to force the federal government to pass legislation to bring those accused of convicted of lynching africanamericans to justice. It passes in the house but it is abandoned in the senate. The person who proposed it urged people to get busy all over the United States<\/a> with parade. And another quote by johnson here. In Public Opinion<\/a> front, lynchings and mobs are not stopping and on the executive front you have statements from president. So the event that sparked the naacp interest in fighting lynching through the wall was a race massacre in Phillips County<\/a>, arkansas in 1919 when a small group of africanamerican farmers peacefully gathered together in a church and were trying to break free from the share cropping system. They were trying to figure out how to break free from the system that was taken advantage of them. A small group of white Law Enforcement<\/a> officials arrived and fired shots against the church hope to kill a number of the labor organizers. Their fire was returned by more fire and one man was ultimately killed. What ensued in Phillips County<\/a> later on and for those that understand the racial dynamics happening. This is 1919 in arkansas and the idea that africanamericans have guns is a very dangerous idea many people say. And there was a need at least for many of the citizens in this area to put this down. What ensued was the worst case of slave violence. Over 300 africanamerican men, children and women were hunted and shot down over the course of three day and thousands were driven from their home and thousands of things were looting and destroyed. There were 12 africanamerican men tried for the mob domiflation and sentenced to die domination it was focused on getting the National Government<\/a> involved in state trials. What is interesting about the case is it was in the process of being swept under the rug. The naacp Head Quarters<\/a> got a letter and walter white, who was an africanamerican but was fair skinned with blue eyes and went down to interview a number of whites and they told him about the craziness that happened. He went back to the naacp and told them they had to get involved in this. What they did was setup a fund and contacted an attorney in arkansas, a white attorney, and began to process of defending the men. From the very beginning the naacp attorneys were well aware of the small likelihood that any of the courts in arkansas would set the africanamerican men free. It was a hostile environment in the area and the white people were fuming from the socalled riot. It seemed the only thing to help would be to take it out of the state of arkansas. The Organization Plan<\/a> today file motions for planned a new trial and went as far as the Supreme Court<\/a>. The naacp believed the case would clear and they must be dealt with by giving power to federal court. The strategy combined with the persistance of the Defense Council<\/a> served them well throughout the course of the legal battle. Three times it was lost in local courts and three times it was lost in state court and denied and dismissed by the United States<\/a> Supreme Court<\/a> on two occasions but they continued to appeal the case. The litigation was long, complex and emotionally exhausting to a relatively new Civil Organization<\/a> but at each stage of defeat the naacp was working with Defense Council<\/a> and strategy to get the federal government involved. Finally on the third attempt, the appeal to the Supreme Court<\/a> was granted. In turn the 14th amendment due process protection saying violation of the clause by the state of arkansas, the naacp briefed in the United States<\/a> Supreme Court<\/a> made a strong case that the influence on the mob of the mob on the court and jury prevented a fair trial and they argued, and i will quote, that the court lost its jurisdiction and the result was an empty ceremony and the verdict was really a mob verdict because no other verdict would have been tolerated. On february 19th, 1923 the Supreme Court<\/a> delivered their vision that relied on the naacp claims for the defenses right to due process were violated. However, the opinion was written that the case is that the whole proceeding is a mask and council, jury and judge were swept by passion and the states court failed to correct the wrong. If true as alleged they make the trial the final part of my talk with the remaining five minutes i have is why did the Supreme Court<\/a> decision hold so much significance not just for the naacp but for the american political system. This could be a cool story about the naacp and dempsey and a case not many know about. But i think that the affects of the case had long range implications. The creation of the naacp litigation strategy to fight for civil right in the rest of the 20th century and more importantly the modern criminal procedure revolution where the Supreme Court<\/a> expanded their power in criminal law and redefined what constituted a fair trial. I believe it is important to understand the structure and expertise of the naacp that played the role during the brown civil rights was determined by an earlier set of events that set it down that path. Brown didnt just happen. We dont just get civil rights or the modern criminal procedure. We understand miranda versus arizona but we need to understand how the political and constitutional change happened. It was the battle around the racial violence that started the shift of the naacp and their supporters about how to success fullly fight Racial Injustice<\/a> in the federal government. The naacp wasted no time using brown for funding their legal department. From 19231924 the Legal Defense<\/a> fund drew from 120 to 1,058 which is a near 600 percent increase in one year. The leadership was affected but also the supporters of the naacp were acutely aware of the impact hof the case and the year after moore versus dempsey was decided people came from all over the state and appealed for aid and the cases reached a total of 476. The naacp reported taking action in most of the cases. Let me skip along here. Moving away from the trojectory of the civil rights agenda, the naacp litigation efforts deserve credit for building up the power of the federal judiciary. The naacp secured the discussion from the Supreme Court<\/a> and new precedent was established and the Supreme Court<\/a> entered a new era of jurisdiction and no longer bound by state courts. And their willingness to intervene on behalf of the africanamerican citizens as well. What the naacp teaches us is the american state doesnt hold a monopoly on force and that institutions can be complacent. But Institutional Development<\/a> drives from the tension between powerful actors and those that protest and critique the projects they suggest to implement. They made a strong case for the growth of the economy and around the issues of violence. The efforts that were brought up were what allowed jim crow laws to be challenged and to set them on a new path. Sharecroppers, teachers and domestic owners and store owners that were unable to sit back and watch the injustice and believed americas best way ada i days were ahead. The Supreme Court<\/a> decision in moore showed that Southern States<\/a> should be involved in the race and justice decisions should be chipped away. I went over seven minutes. Questions, anybody . I am trained as a political theory major and interested in political cultural and the ordinaryness of the citizens toward the end of the talk and there are talks about the ideas of culture and africanamerican life during that period and how people interested in Political Action<\/a> would perform actions politically in the manner in which you describe them. To put it differently, what made it so that the pursuit of Political Action<\/a> counted as political for these people as opposed to the grandizement of poplar sentiment. Why are those political and not governmental and constitutional activities . That people saw access and intervention in them as opposed to other kinds of form of activities. You are asking in terms of the people involved and lets say the Letter Writing Campaign<\/a> to lets say wilson and or harding or those who got involved in trying to help in the case. Your question is why are these considered political to me . You seem to suggest citizenship is about intervening in the establishment. So that is the exact same question. So at the heart of the question is what constitutes Citizen Agency<\/a> and also Political Engagement<\/a> and process here, right . Part of the push back is about the way i am understanding and using whether that is letter writi writing or whatnot forming engagement in the state. As opposed to other africanamerican activities. Such as . I actually think they all constitute different forms of Political Engagement<\/a>. Part of my civic critique is based on Constitutional Development<\/a> so the way they understand political activity is one in which it isnt political activity unless the state institution is moved. For the most part they dont include regular every day black, latino or white citizens. It is normally now institutions behave and political actors behave. It isnt fully satisfying to me because i agree different forms. I focus on a particular way that johnson acts. And the way he is engaged politically is, i think, a beautiful ray of different ways, but i dont specifically focus on the letter writing but the work on the legal case and that is just an intervention into the Political Development<\/a> where that discounts it. If i were mainstream in Political Science<\/a> i would say there is no way that the renaissance had a role in Political Development<\/a> because it didnt shape anything. There is not a direct line between the harlem renaissance and change in the political institution. And what i am trying to get out is even if i take an antique notion of political activity and agency there should be a consideration of the way marginalized groups, in my case africanamericans, are acting here. It is one slice of a much larger pie. Really good presentation. So i am trying to get a clearer understanding of, i guess, the takeaway that you are emphasising here. I have read a book written by morris and it talks about the way things were organized and the way they impact institutions and deals with segregation in the south and so on. Are you talking about similar types of activity in terms of agency when you look at the earlier period and trying to extend the analysis back in time because you are saying that period hasnt been analyzed or is there Something Different<\/a> that is beyond what morris is doing. Yes and no. That is a great question. One of my critique writings whether it is morris work or work on the later period is so much literature around organizing and the naacp focused on the later period. And there is so much focus on what happens before and there is an establishment of what happened in political law and it says this organizing matters but it ultimately didnt shape anything right. So the way they do this is pair the organizing against National Security<\/a> concern in terms of the cold war and they are like this is what forced people to move. So i want to focus on a much earlier period and say if all of the literature in terms at least in Political Science<\/a> focuses on post45 and a lot of the literature in africanamerican studies focuses on post40. I want to say we should extend that analysis much earlier. So there is this amazing organizing to the naacp in the teens and 20s around the issue of racial violence and the way that political scientist discounted is through the cold war and that narrative doesnt exist at least in this period. You cannot understand miranda because that is a case where the Supreme Court<\/a> has been involved in state court trials. Right . But this is the first case in which the Supreme Court<\/a> gets involved. Part of where i came and was interested in this event, i read public law book and constitutional law books in grad school and i wrote i will write about how the naacp forget about the issue of injustice. I didnt know it started in 1909 or understand how to do archiveal research and i got involved and started reading and saw the naacp is involved. But the way the narratives are written now is the naacp vacates ground and there is housing and Capital Punishment<\/a> cases but not a story about criminal procedure beginning with the naacp and organizing. And there is not a story that the naacp isnt just kind atmosphe atmosphere kind of the litigation that was focused on the protest on the ground and through the presidency and through congress and perhaps the political branches were hollower than the courts were. Any other questions . Great presentation. Do you draw a connection to say at the beginning of the 21st century to where we are now . The ground level organizing might be something a lot of people now are calling for. Right. Thank you. Actually it fascinates me. In terms of implications of my wo work, i think maybe there is two or three, but i will focus on one in terms of organizing rights. With some of the occupied protest and the other protest and the stop and frisk that happened in new york. I address stop and frisk in new york in four pages. But a basic question about how rights organizations mobilize to create change against injustice in the american political system. Part of, i think, in terms of part of the implications of my work i would like to think is a way to rethink organizing change. I will jump around but i promise to make it quick. When i teach classes about law and society they are like of course. If you are speaking in this idea about you protest or political system or courts to bring about change . And they are all saying courts. It is always all about the courts with africanamerican right and lgbt rights. Here is the naacp without the 40s and 50s. Here it is in 1911, 1916 and so on and how they are like how do we fight for rights still believing in a just system and they will do Public Opinion<\/a> and make interim and dont change much but they do it. Then they try the political system and that doesnt change the game but it is important. And congress, too. And then they go to court. So one of the take aways is that movements and struggles for justice need not to focus on one specific institution. Here the naacp in 1909 and 1911 working with all of the institution and not focused on one. It is maybe this time the presidency will create what we need, maybe the courts will, or maybe the congress will. And they were going to go with whoever was like there is going to be some type of protection but it wasnt a matter of lets focus on court and creating legislation. I think the naacp with very little resources were able to create sustained change and i think that movements today need to focus on all of the different branches. Thank you. I wanted [applause] you are watching booktv. Television for serious readers. You can watch any program you see here online at booktv. Org. Tell us what you learned about watergate that we didnt know . We learned what we had not kno known previously was the crimes to coverup went all the way back to before he was elected president in 1968. Chasing shadows is about the affair that was the republican sabotage of linden johnsons peace talk for the vietnam war. And Richard Nixon<\/a> said publically as the republican nominee he would not do anything to interfere with the peace talks. Behind the scenes, he had a fundraiser, a permanent fundraiser who raised a quarter million for republicans that year. Secretly urging the South Vietnam<\/a> government to stay away from the peace talks. This is a violation of the law. The 1799 logan act makes it illegal for any american citizen to interfere with negotiations of the United States<\/a> government. And johnson found out about it indirectly. He learned about it from sap who warned roosevelt that the nazi were developing an atomic bomb and a week before the election, johnson heard from contacts on wall street as nixon was interfering with the peace talks and johnson checked it out. The cia had a bug in the office and the National Security<\/a> agency was intercepting from the south ambassador in washington to the saigon government. So johnson was able to piece it together but not get the smoking gun. You learned about to take it. This wasnt true. Nixon didnt know it. He ordered aids to get their hands on everything having to do with the bomb involved once he is president. He said he wanted to do it because he thinks johnson called to help the election","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia800902.us.archive.org\/31\/items\/CSPAN2_20141225_204500_Book_Discussion_Civil_Rights_and_the_Making\/CSPAN2_20141225_204500_Book_Discussion_Civil_Rights_and_the_Making.thumbs\/CSPAN2_20141225_204500_Book_Discussion_Civil_Rights_and_the_Making_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240621T12:35:10+00:00"}