During the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Southern states developed legal structures to disenfranchise Black voters while avoiding direct violations of the federal Constitution. When the U.S. Supreme Court in *Guinn v. United States* (1915) struck down Oklahoma's grandfather clause because it implicitly used pre-Reconstruction voting status as a racial proxy, Southern states continued to successfully disenfranchise Black citizens through literacy tests and poll taxes. Which of the following best explains why these latter mechanisms remained legally viable despite the ruling in *Guinn*?
- AThey were classified as private association rules rather than state actions, placing them outside the jurisdiction of the Fifteenth Amendment.
- BThe Supreme Court ruled that voting in state elections was a state right not protected by the federal Reconstruction Amendments.
- They were written using facially neutral language that did not explicitly mention race, shifting the burden of racial exclusion to the discretionary enforcement of local registrars.Cevap
- DThey were temporary measures that automatically expired once a state reached a target registration threshold of educated voters.
Cevap
The correct answer states that they were written using facially neutral language that did not explicitly mention race, shifting the burden of racial exclusion to the discretionary enforcement of local registrars.
The correct option is correct because the Supreme Court upheld literacy tests and poll taxes on the grounds that they did not explicitly violate the Fifteenth Amendment's prohibition on racial discrimination. Because these laws were facially neutral, states could rely on the administrative discretion of white registrars to selectively disqualify Black applicants while passing white applicants, effectively maintaining de jure disenfranchisement through discriminatory de facto enforcement.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
The structural implementation of disenfranchisement through facially neutral legislation and discretionary local enforcement, maintaining de jure white supremacy under the guise of constitutional compliance.