| Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued April 1–2, 1968 Decided June 17, 1968 | |
| Full case name | Joseph Lee Jones et ux. v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. et al. |
| Citations | 392U.S.409 (more) 88 S. Ct. 2186; 20L. Ed. 2d 1189; 1968U.S. LEXIS 2980; 1 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) ¶ 9832; 47 Ohio Op. 2d 43 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit |
| Holding | |
| TheThirteenth Amendment allowsCongress to regulate the sale of private property to prevent racial discrimination, as such racial discrimination is a badge of slavery. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Stewart, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Brennan, Fortas, Marshall |
| Concurrence | Douglas |
| Dissent | Harlan, joined by White |
| Laws applied | |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1982 | |
This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings | |
| Hodges v. United States, 203 U.S. 1 (1906),[1] &Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) (in part) | |
Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., 392 U.S. 409 (1968), is alandmarkUnited States Supreme Court case which held thatCongress could regulate the sale of private property to prevent racial discrimination: "[42 U.S.C. § 1982] bars all racial discrimination, private as well as public, in the sale or rental of property, and that the statute, thus construed, is a valid exercise of the power of Congress to enforce theThirteenth Amendment."[1]
TheCivil Rights Act of 1866 (passed by Congress over the veto ofAndrew Johnson) provided the basis for this decision as embodied by42 U.S.C. § 1982.
Reversing many precedents, the Supreme Court held that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 prohibited both private and state-backed discrimination and that the 13th Amendment authorized Congress to prohibit private acts of discrimination as among "the badges and incidents of slavery." Congress possessed the power to "determine what are the badges and incidents of slavery, and the authority to translate that determination into effective legislation."
Syllabus: "[T]he badges and incidents of slavery that the Thirteenth Amendment empowered Congress to eliminate included restraints upon those fundamental rights which are the essence of civil freedom, namely, the same right... to inherit, purchase, lease, sell and convey property, as is enjoyed by white citizens.Civil Rights Cases, 09 U.S. 3, 22. Insofar asHodges v. United States, 203 U.S. 1, suggests a contrary holding, it is overruled." Footnote 78: "[W]e note that the entire Court [in the Civil Rights Cases; content added] agreed upon at least one proposition: the Thirteenth Amendment authorizes Congress not only to outlaw all forms of slavery and involuntary servitude, but also to eradicate the last vestiges and incidents of a society half slave and half free by securing to all citizens, of every race and color, the same right to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to inherit, purchase, lease, sell and convey property, as is enjoyed by white citizens.... The conclusion of the majority inHodges rested upon a concept of congressional power under the Thirteenth Amendment irreconcilable with the position taken by every member of this Court in the Civil Rights Cases and incompatible with the history and purpose of the Amendment itself. Insofar as Hodges is inconsistent with our holding today, it is hereby overruled."
 | This article related to a case of theSupreme Court of the United States of theWarren Court is astub. You can help Wikipedia byexpanding it. |
