This HTML5 document contains 152 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
yago-reshttp://yago-knowledge.org/resource/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
n23http://dbpedia.org/resource/File:
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n24https://books.google.com/
n31http://www.commonlii.org/uk/cases/EngR/1835/
n28https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
umbel-rchttp://umbel.org/umbel/rc/
yagohttp://dbpedia.org/class/yago/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n15http://dbpedia.org/resource/Landmark_Cases:
n26http://landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/17/
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
n29http://dbpedia.org/resource/S:
n12https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/109/3/
n16http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep109/usrep109003/
dbpedia-simplehttp://simple.dbpedia.org/resource/
n8http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
goldhttp://purl.org/linguistics/gold/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/
n25https://openjurist.org/109/us/
n19http://www.worldlii.org/us/cases/federal/USSC/1883/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Civil_Rights_Cases
rdf:type
dbo:Case dbo:Band yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity yago:Happening107283608 dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase yago:Event100029378 yago:WikicatUnitedStatesSupremeCourtCases yago:Abstraction100002137 wikidata:Q2334719 yago:Case107308889 umbel-rc:Event owl:Thing yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 dbo:UnitOfWork dbo:LegalCase
rdfs:label
Civil Rights Cases
rdfs:comment
The Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883), were a group of five landmark cases in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments did not empower Congress to outlaw racial discrimination by private individuals. The holding that the Thirteenth Amendment did not empower the federal government to punish racist acts done by private citizens would be overturned by the Supreme Court in the 1968 case Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. The Fourteenth Amendment not applying to private entities, however, is still valid precedent to this day. Although the Fourteenth Amendment-related decision has never been overturned, in the 1964 case of Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, the Supreme Court held that Congress could prohibit racial discrimination b
foaf:name
United States v. Stanley; United States v. Ryan; United States v. Nichols; United States v. Singleton; Robinson et ux. v. Memphis & Charleston R.R. Co.
foaf:depiction
n8:JudgeJMHarlan.jpg n8:Joseph_Philo_Bradley_-_Brady-Handy.jpg
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_federal_civil_rights_legislation dbc:United_States_Fourteenth_Amendment,_section_five_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Waite_Court dbc:1883_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_equal_protection_case_law dbc:Reconstruction_Era_legislation
dbo:wikiPageID
146264
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1104949464
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:C-SPAN dbr:John_Marshall_Harlan dbr:Racial_discrimination dbr:Commerce_Clause dbr:John_Taylor_Coleridge dbr:Constantine_v_Imperial_Hotels_Ltd dbr:Privileges_or_Immunities_Clause dbr:Tennessee dbc:United_States_federal_civil_rights_legislation dbr:Reconstruction_Era dbc:United_States_Fourteenth_Amendment,_section_five_case_law dbr:Civil_Rights_Movement n15:_Historic_Supreme_Court_Decisions dbr:U.S._v._Cruikshank dbr:U._S._v._Cruikshank dbr:United_States_v._Cruikshank dbr:Civil_Rights_Act_of_1875 dbr:Corporation dbr:Slaughter-House_Cases dbr:Mercy dbr:William_Blackstone dbr:Slavery dbr:Republic dbr:Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 dbr:United_States_v._Morrison dbr:US_corporate_law dbr:List_of_landmark_court_decisions_in_the_United_States dbr:Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel_v._United_States dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_US_Constitution dbr:Virginia_v._Rives dbr:Rex_v._Ivens dbr:Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel,_Inc._v._United_States dbr:American_Civil_War dbr:Olcott_v._Supervisors n23:JudgeJMHarlan.jpg n23:Joseph_Philo_Bradley_-_Brady-Handy.jpg dbr:Joseph_P._Bradley dbr:Post-office dbr:Republicanism dbr:L._Ed. dbr:Public_accommodations_in_the_United_States dbr:Abraham_Lincoln dbr:Peik_v._Chicago_&_N._W._Ry._Co. dbr:Radical_Republicans dbr:Jim_Crow_Laws dbr:Munn_v._Illinois dbr:Ex_parte_Virginia dbr:U.S._v._Fisher dbr:US_labor_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Waite_Court dbr:Tyranny dbc:1883_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:Jones_v._Alfred_H._Mayer_Co. dbr:McCulloch_v._Maryland dbr:Violence_Against_Women_Act n29:Civil_Rights_Cases dbr:Toll_road dbr:Strauder_v._West_Virginia dbr:Ohio dbr:Indiana dbc:United_States_equal_protection_case_law dbc:Reconstruction_Era_legislation dbr:List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_109 dbr:Civil_rights dbr:Neal_v._Delaware dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:14th_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Emancipation_Proclamation dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Plessy_v._Ferguson
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n12: n16:usrep109003.pdf n19:182.html n24:books%3Fid=ZYHqJmlB53MC n24:books%3Fid=ZYHqJmlB53MC&pg=PA45 n25:3 n26:Civil-Rights-Cases n31:613.pdf
owl:sameAs
freebase:m.012myv dbpedia-simple:Civil_Rights_Cases yago-res:Civil_Rights_Cases wikidata:Q5124539 n28:4iJ5g
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Ussc dbt:US14thAmendment dbt:Wikisource dbt:Wikisource-inline dbt:Cite_book dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Cite_Americana dbt:Reflist dbt:Short_description dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case
dbo:thumbnail
n8:Joseph_Philo_Bradley_-_Brady-Handy.jpg?width=300
dbp:dissent
Harlan
dbp:joinmajority
Waite, Miller, Field, Woods, Matthews, Gray, Blatchford
dbp:lawsapplied
dbr:Civil_Rights_Act_of_1875 dbr:Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Slaughter-House_Cases dbr:Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
dbp:parallelcitations
3
dbp:uspage
3
dbp:usvol
109
dbp:case
Civil Rights Cases,
dbp:decidedate
0001-10-15
dbp:decideyear
1883
dbp:fullname
United States v. Stanley; United States v. Ryan; United States v. Nichols; United States v. Singleton; Robinson et ux. v. Memphis & Charleston R.R. Co.
dbp:holding
The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments did not empower Congress to safeguard black people against the actions of private individuals. To decide otherwise would afford black people a special status under the law that white people did not enjoy.
dbp:justia
n12:
dbp:litigants
The Civil Rights Cases
dbp:majority
Bradley
dbp:otherSource
WorldLII
dbp:otherUrl
n19:182.html
dbp:loc
n16:usrep109003.pdf
dbo:abstract
The Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883), were a group of five landmark cases in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments did not empower Congress to outlaw racial discrimination by private individuals. The holding that the Thirteenth Amendment did not empower the federal government to punish racist acts done by private citizens would be overturned by the Supreme Court in the 1968 case Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. The Fourteenth Amendment not applying to private entities, however, is still valid precedent to this day. Although the Fourteenth Amendment-related decision has never been overturned, in the 1964 case of Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, the Supreme Court held that Congress could prohibit racial discrimination by private actors under the Commerce Clause, though that and other loose interpretations of the Clause to expand federal power have been subject to criticism. During Reconstruction, Congress had passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875, which entitled everyone to access accommodation, public transport, and theaters regardless of race or color. In his majority opinion in the Civil Rights Cases, Associate Justice Joseph P. Bradley struck down the Civil Rights Act of 1875, holding that the Thirteenth Amendment "merely abolishes slavery" and that the Fourteenth Amendment did not give Congress the power to outlaw private acts of racial discrimination. Associate Justice John Marshall Harlan was the lone dissenter in the case, writing that the "substance and spirit of the recent amendments of the constitution have been sacrificed by a subtle and ingenious verbal criticism." The decision ushered in the widespread segregation of blacks in housing, employment, and public life that confined them to second-class citizenship throughout much of the United States until the passage of civil rights legislation in the 1960s.
dbp:openjurist
n25:3
gold:hypernym
dbr:Group
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Civil_Rights_Cases?oldid=1104949464&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
36290
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Civil_Rights_Cases