Shut Up and Dribble

 

Legislative Disenfranchisement 

The Civil Rights Era

 

During the Modern Civil Rights era, two separate legislative disenfranchisement events occurred, Adam Clayton Powell and Julian Bond. Both were critically involved in the movement and intimately involved in their respective communities. But, whereas Powell was a seasoned legislator with major political power, Bond was facing his first term as an elected official. The causes and results of their legislative disenfranchisement varied, but the outcome for their constituents mirrored those during Reconstruction.

The Democratically controlled Georgia House of Representatives, on January 10, 1966, overwhelmingly voted not to seat Julian Bond because he was critical of the U.S. involvement in Viet Nam sided with students who were then protesting the war. A year later, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Bond's First Amendment rights had been violated and ordered that he be seated. Although Bond would serve for 20 more years, this interruption meant his seat was vacant, and his constituents had no voice in the Legislature for a year. 

Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was the first African American to be elected to Congress from any state in the Northeast, particularly New York. His electoral victories starting in 1945 continued until 1941. Over nearly three decades, 11 consecutive terms, he became one of the most important Demoncrats serving in Congress. (Daniels 1973). In 1967 the Democratically controlled House voted to expel him from office. And though he regained his seat in 1968, he had lost his committee chairmanship and seniority. Ultimately the Supreme Court in 1969 ruled that the expulsion was unconstitutional, and Powell never regained his powerful voice in the House. The removal of Powell meant that Harlem was the only congressional district in the nation without a representative from 1967 to 1969. (Haygood 2006)

The exclusion of  Julien Bond in Georgia and Adam Clayton Powell demonstrate the social and political consequences of legislative disenfranchisement. The fact that both were Black and outspoken in their critique of racial injustice, U.S. policy (both at home and abroad) challenged the presumptions of democracy and the right of the people to have representatives that they chose. In the process, they challenged the voters' fundamental rights and democracy. (Kindregan 1968) Both cases represent a "white backlash" that emerged to keep Black officeholders and their constituents in their place. (Manning 2013)

Black Lives Matter Movement

 

In the aftermath of the George Floyd killing, a new social movement and level of activism emerged across the United States. And with this new period, a new wave of "white backlash" in the form of legislative disenfranchisement is observable. 

On a primary day in May in Jefferson County, the most populous and diverse county in the State, elected Tiara Young Hudson won the Democratic primary for circuit judge. But two weeks later, amid the celebration, a state commission, divided along racial lines, dissolved the judgeship and relocated the seat from Jefferson County to the majority-white Madison County. The Alabama Supreme Court, in 2023, dismissed Hudson's complaint and sided with the Judicial Resources Allocation Commission. (Gann, 2023) This "legislative disenfranchisement" effectively stripped the substantial Black population of a critical resource and gave that resource to a county where white people comprised nearly 70% of the population. (Schrader 2022) Lawmakers in Mississippi decided to do a similar thing in Jackson, another majority Black city.

On March 31, Mississippi's overwhelmingly White and Republican Legislature sent Gov. Tate Reeves legislation that would effectively create a "state-controlled police force and court system" within the boundaries of Jackson. Jackson, the capital city with 150,000 residents,  is the State's center of Black political power. It also, with eight in 10 residents Black, has the highest percentage of Black residents in the country. (Wines 2023)  The legislation calls for these new enforcement and court systems to be located in the mostly White sections of Jackson. Thus, when municipal budgets are strapped, the State Legislature redirects funds away from the Black-controlled administration to the State-controlled police force and court system. 

Across the three periods, in all cases, legislative disenfranchisement results in the loss of control by the electorate, loss of power by the elected officials, and ultimately frustration on the part of all. This brings us to the situation in Tennessee where Republican lawmakers expelled two Black men, Justin Jones, and Justin Pearson. And though their respective communities voted to reappoint them within days, the trauma was real, and they still must go through a special election. Their crime, much like those in the past, was that they were Black, outspoken, and pushed for change. As a result, their communities were legislatively disenfranchised. Only time will tell if this leads to frustration, loss of power, and a loss of control.