Introduction
The endorsement of the Civil Rights Act and its implementation had a significant impact on American society throughout the years, addressing the issues related to discrimination. Several civil rights acts have been introduced since 1866, with each legislation addressing complications related to racial, ethnic, and other types of distinctions between individuals (Dorosin, 2016). The most notable Civil Rights Act is considered to be the law signed by President Lyndon Johnson in 1964, which led to the end of racial segregation practices in America (Dorosin, 2016).
As the mentioned policy was enforced, the social environment began to gradually change, accepting the inherent right of each individual regardless of their race, sex, ethnicity, and social status. This paper focuses on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, discussing its coverage in scholarly literature, implications for the public, discussions in Congress, and the current success of the legislation.
Literature Review of the Issue
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is one of the most well-recognized federal policies, frequently discussed in scholarly literature. The implementation of this law and its consequences were highlighted as positive factors in the change in American Society, which led to significant adjustments in the social status of ethnic minorities. Scholars mention that the introduced law’s political, economic, and social ramifications had an enormous impact on the African-American individuals, as it acknowledged their civil rights on the federal level and allowed the civil rights supporters to continue their fight (Hayter, 2018).
In this regard, although the Civil Rights Act of 1964 could not entirely solve the problems experienced by numerous minorities, it served as a push that began the civil rights reformation, leading to a series of laws that supported the initiated changes.
Currently, scholarly research suggests that the influence of this act has spread to numerous areas of minorities’ everyday lives, improving their well-being and social standing. The freedom from discriminatory impact is a powerful phenomenon applied to educational, working, economic, and social spheres (Hahn et al., 2018). From the Christian perspective, by directly addressing the existent racial segregation and discrimination issues, this act recognized the negative influence of stereotypes and prejudice, promoting racial acceptance. Altogether, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is considered a majorly positive event, and its impact on American society can be observed even today.
So What: What are the policy implications?
The consequences following the introduction of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were especially valuable for racial, religious, and national minorities who acquired protection from public segregation and received access to previously unavailable accommodations. The disparities between the white and African-American populations were especially affected by this law, which prohibited discrimination in such social establishments as restaurants, theaters, and vehicles (Civil Rights Act of 1964, 2009).
Apart from being eligible to enter multiply enterprises, racial minorities also received the opportunity to overcome discrimination at the workplace and in labor unions, capable of filing a lawsuit against employers violating the introduced legislation (Civil Rights Act of 1964, 2009). Therefore, African-American individuals, the majority of which were previously forced to live at the edge of poverty, now acquired possibilities equal to other populations, with the society moving towards a more Christian way of living.
This policy is exceptionally significant for the concepts of social justice and the inherent rights of any individual, which should be preserved by government entities. As such, before this legislation, the Supreme Court upheld the notion that racial segregation was constitutional, thus legitimately barring specific populations from equal access to public facilities (Cole, 2019). Federal and state courts discouraged the concept of equality, eliminating the possibility for African-Americans to be treated equally.
However, as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enacted, segregation became unconstitutional, affecting the civil status of ethnic minorities on a federal level. Government entities were now forced to apply anti-discriminatory practices, meaning that federal and state courts, as well as the Supreme Court, were to protect the civil rights of previously disadvantaged groups (Civil Rights Act of 1991, 2009). In addition, following this legislation, the Department of Justice launched an evaluation campaign that identified potential breaches of this act, aiming to account for previously inactive discriminatory decisions (Hayter, 2018).
These events also allowed the United States to remain on the path toward consolidated democracy. According to this concept, democracy becomes consolidated when various social groups can participate in political activities (Dorosin, 2016). Therefore, the importance of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 lies not only in the improved well-being of minority populations but is also connected to the upheaval of consolidated democracy and the recognition of equal opportunities for everyone.
Where Did the Policy Interact with the Public through Public Opinion?
The necessity to introduce the discussed policy developed over the years following the civil war, as several state laws remained discriminatory against African-Americans. The existence of the Jim Crow legislation was especially harmful to the ethnic groups, rejecting their inherent civil rights (Dorosin, 2016). However, protest movements against these measures and social campaigns began to rise, demonstrating that the public was significantly outraged by the lack of anti-discriminatory practices in federal and state legislation (Schmidt, 2018).
The need to implement protective measures became especially evident after the Birmingham riot, which manifested the adverse violent outcomes created by the absence of necessary desegregation laws (Schmidt, 2018). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 addressed the outlined issues, offering African-American populations protection from civil rights violations and freedom.
The policy received distinct positive and negative evaluations from different public groups. Although it was negatively reviewed by several civil rights activists, it perfectly aligned with public opinion, which deemed the unequal distribution of power between ethnic groups as acting against the Christian principles of conduct (Spriggs, 2017). Consistent riots, numerous social movements, and civil rights activists persistently fought against segregation, demonstrating that the public opinion regarding this phenomenon was predominantly negative (Spriggs, 2017). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 appealed to these perspectives, considering the social atmosphere accommodating the needs of the public.
The Discussions in the Congress
The Congress discussions regarding the Civil Rights Act of 1964 were especially prolonged. Affected by the death of John Kennedy, some Congress representatives were eager to pass this law in honor of the president’s memory. However, the political parties’ opinions on the bill were highly distinct, with the Southern Democrats party remaining opposed to the introduction of the law (U.S. Senate: Landmark Legislation: The Civil Rights Act of 1964, n.d.).
The Republican representatives were considered a minority in the Senate, and the votes from each Republican became of exceptional value for the supporters of the Civil Rights Act. Considering that some of the Republican senators attempted to oppose the law due to objections to specific provisions, it was imperative to initiate changes that would comply with the Republican demands (U.S. Senate: Landmark Legislation: The Civil Rights Act of 1964, n.d.). Finally, after delaying the decision for 60 days, the Senate voted to end the discussion, and the civil rights legislation was accepted. Currently, this policy is referred to as Public Law 88-352, 78 Stat. 241, United States Statutes at Large, Volume 78, 88th Congress, 2nd Session.
From the perspective of the checks and balance system, this act can be easily balanced by the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. While the act was approved by Congress, which is capable of improving presidential nominations and creating laws, it was also heavily endorsed by the president, who enforced the Congress discussions (Dorosin, 2016). After that, district courts and the Supreme Court, which typically interpret the established legislation, considered the act constitutional and applied it in practice, securing its future use.
Who Are the Identified Stakeholders?
The identified stakeholders of this legislation were the representative of ethnic minorities using the public services and suffering from the ongoing segregation. From the Christian perspective, the act initiated an essential process of desegregation, which was to benefit African-Americans who were at a significant disadvantage. Therefore, adult representatives of ethnic minorities who visited public accommodations and/or had occupations were to gain basic opportunities already available to the white population, decreasing the distinction between these social groups (Hahn et al., 2018). After that, children attending schools were also positively affected by the introduction, as they were now capable of being admitted to quality schools that were previously considered exclusive to the white population.
Controversially, African-American individuals were both positively and negatively affected by the legislation, as the passing of this bill indirectly promoted the ongoing practices of racism. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 aimed to protect ethnic minorities from the onslaught of segregation, but it simultaneously highlighted the enormous educational and social distinctions between the privileged and underprivileged groups, providing the racial offenders with supplementary reasons to discriminate against the minorities (McCall, 2019).
Substantial differences in job performance, and social and learning skills evident in African-American populations were considered as additional evidence of their incapacity. Thus, even though the ethnic minorities received a formal opportunity to be properly educated, employed, and socialized, in reality, years of segregation and lack of basic civil rights created a tremendous social gap which was highlighted by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
What Do the Courts Have to Say?
In general, the courts upheld the enacted Civil Rights Act, endorsing the anti-discriminatory practices. The importance of desegregation and controversial decisions regarding the social status of ethnic minorities were already previously recognized by the Supreme Court, which made several desegregation-aimed decisions before 1964. The cases of Brown versus Board of Education and Dred Scott openly addressed the constitutional civil rights of African-Americans, questioning the evident lack of discriminatory protection in the existent legislation and the necessity to improve the situation (Dorosin, 2016).
Therefore, the introduction of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 was generally supported by the majority of the courts, especially in states where slavery was prohibited. In the following years, the decisions approved by the federal and state courts, as well as the Supreme Court, demonstrated that these institutions accepted the Civil Rights Act, upholding desegregation (Cole, 2019). Altogether, even though the Civil Rights Act of 1964 remained controversial at that time, the court system majorly supported this legislation, relying on it during numerous cases in the following years.
Where Is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Now?
Currently, the Civil Rights Act enacted in 1964 is considered a successful endeavor that allowed to improve discriminatory practices mitigation in the United States. As such, the impact of this law is connected to positive learning outcomes for children from ethnic minority families, and the act is used in contemporary state court practice to ensure quality education available for all students (Cole, 2019). Furthermore, workers from previously socially disadvantaged populations gained a possibility to acquire a credible occupation, thus enhancing their economic and community status (Films Media Group, 2014). In addition, the effects of this legislation are suggested to have spread to such fields as women’s rights and social justice, inspiring other minorities to fight for their civil rights and freedom from discrimination (Hunter, 2021).
Nevertheless, the failure to account for the years of segregation and its impact on the African-American population’s capabilities, which caused the continuation of racial injustice practices, can be highlighted as a substantial failure.
Conclusion
Overall, the segregation of ethnic minorities in numerous occupations and school grounds has been a tremendous problem for various populations in the US, resulting in multiple discriminatory practices and stereotypes applied to ethnicities. Such attitudes considerably hindered affected individuals’ working, educational, and socialization processes, forcing them to experience the negative effects of racial, religious, and national segregation. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 significantly enhanced the welfare of African-American populations, offering them an opportunity to improve their living situation and overcome complications related to consistent segregation over previous centuries. Furthermore, both governmental and civilian entities, such as courts, federal state, and local bureaus, agencies, and governments were entitled to enhance their functions, protecting ethnic minorities from discriminatory attitudes by referring to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
References
Civil Rights Act of 1964. (2009). Great Neck Pub.
Civil Rights Act of 1991. (2009). Great Neck Pub.
Cole, J. P. (1964). Civil Rights at School: Agency Enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Congressional Research Service, Report R45665, Version 5.
Dorosin, M. (2016). A Civil Rights Act for the 21st Century: The Privileges and Immunities Clause and a Constitutional Guarantee to be Free from Discriminatory Impact. Wake Forest Journal of Law & Policy, 6(1).
Films Media Group. (2014). How the civil rights act changed America. Films On Demand. Web.
Hahn, R. A., Truman, B. I., & Williams, D. R. (2018). Civil rights as determinants of public health and racial and ethnic health equity: Health care, education, employment, and housing in the United States. Population Health, 4, 17–24. Web.
Hayter, J. M. (2018). To end divisions: Reflections on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In J. Hayter & G. Goethals, Reconstruction and the Arc of Racial (In)Justice (pp. 130–142). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hunter, N. D. (2021). In Search of Equality for Women: From Suffrage to Civil Rights. Duquesne Law Review, 59, 125–166.
McCall, M. (2019). Environmental Racism: The U.S. EPA’s Ineffective Enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Southern Journal of Policy and Justice, 13, 49–56.
Schmidt, C. W. (2018). The Sit-Ins: Protest and Legal Change in the Civil Rights Era. University of Chicago Press.
Spriggs, K. (2017). Voices of Civil Rights Lawyers: Reflections from the Deep South, 1964–1980. University Press of Florida.
U.S. Senate: Landmark Legislation: The Civil Rights Act of 1964. (n.d.). Web.