On Easter Sunday in 1873, more than one hundred black men were gunned down in Grant Parish, Louisiana, for daring to assert their right to vote. Several months earlier, in Lexington, Kentucky, another black man was denied the right to vote for simply failing to pay a poll tax. Both events typified the intense opposition to the federal guarantee of black voting rights. Both events led to landmark Supreme Court decisions. And, as Robert Goldman shows, both events have much to tell us about an America that was still deeply divided over the status of blacks during the Reconstruction era. Goldman deftly highlights the cases of United States v. Reese and United States v. Cruikshank within the context of an ongoing power struggle between state and federal authorities and the realities of being black in postwar America. Focusing especially on the so-called Reconstruction Amendments and Enforcement Acts, he argues that the decisions in Reese and Cruikshank signaled an enormous gap between guaranteed and enforced rights. The Court's decisions denied the very existence of any such guarantee and, further, conferred upon the states the right to determine who may vote and under what circumstances. In both decisions, lower court convictions were overturned through suprisingly narrrow rulings, despite the larger constitutional issues involved. In Reese the Court justified its decision by voiding only two sections of the Enforcement Acts, while in Cruikshank it merely voided the original indictments as being "insufficient in law" by failing to allege that the Grant Parish murders had been explicitly motivated by racial prejudice. Such legalistic reasoning marked the grim beginning of a nearly century-long struggle to reclaim what the Fifteenth Amendment had supposedly guaranteed. As Goldman shows, the Court's decisions undermined the fledgling efforts of the newly formed justice department and made it increasingly difficult to control the racial violence, intimidation, poll taxes, and other less visible means used by white southern Democrats to "redeem" their political power. The result was a disenfranchised black society in a hostile and still segregated South. Only with the emergence of a nationwide civil rights movement and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 did things begin to change. Readable and insightful, Goldman's study offers students, scholars, and concerned citizens a strong reminder of what happens when courts refuse to enforce constitutional and legislated law-and what might happen again if we aren't vigilant in protecting the rights of all Americans. This book is part of the Landmark Law Cases and American Society series.

Reconstruction and Black Suffrage: Losing the Vote in Reese and Cruikshank

History

Goldman, Robert M.

Americas

Univ Pr of Kansas

On Easter Sunday in 1873, more than one hundred black men were gunned down in Grant Parish, Louisiana, for daring to assert their right to vote. Several months earlier, in Lexington, Kentucky, another black man was denied the right to vote for simply failing to pay a poll tax. Both events typified the intense opposition to the federal guarantee of black voting rights. Both events led to landmark Supreme Court decisions. And, as Robert Goldman shows, both events have much to tell us about an America that was still deeply divided over the status of blacks during the Reconstruction era. Goldman deftly highlights the cases of United States v. Reese and United States v. Cruikshank within the context of an ongoing power struggle between state and federal authorities and the realities of being black in postwar America. Focusing especially on the so-called Reconstruction Amendments and Enforcement Acts, he argues that the decisions in Reese and Cruikshank signaled an enormous gap between guaranteed and enforced rights. The Court's decisions denied the very existence of any such guarantee and, further, conferred upon the states the right to determine who may vote and under what circumstances. In both decisions, lower court convictions were overturned through suprisingly narrrow rulings, despite the larger constitutional issues involved. In Reese the Court justified its decision by voicing only two sections of the Enforcement Acts, while in Cruikshank it merely voided the original indictments as being "insufficient in law" by failing to allege that the Grant Parish murders had been explicitly motivated by racial concerns. Such legalistic reasoning marked the grim beginning of a nearly century-long struggle to reclaim what the Fifteenth Amendment had supposedly guaranteed. As Goldman shows, the Court's decisions undermined the fledgling efforts of the newly formed justice department and made it increasingly difficult to control the racial violence, intimidation, poll taxes, and other less visible means used by white southern Democrats to "redeem" their political power. The result was a disenfranchised black society in a hostile and still segregated South. Only with the emergence of a nationwide civil rights movement and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 did things begin to change. Readable and insightful, Goldman's study offers students, scholars, and concerned citizens a strong reminder of what happens when courts refuse to enforce constitutional and legislated law—and what might happen again if we aren't vigilant in protecting the rights of all Americans.

University Press of Kansas

When Curt Flood, all-star center fielder for the St. Louis Cardinals, refused to be traded to the Philadelphia Phillies in 1968, he sent shock waves throughout professional baseball that ultimately reached the Supreme Court. Flood challenged the game's reserve clause system that bound players to teams as if they were property; and while others had previously spoken out against this arrangement, protected by Congress and the courts for a century, he was the first to pursue his grievance as doggedly or as far. Robert Goldman now offers a new look at Flood's efforts to shake the foundations of major league baseball. One Man Out takes readers back to the pre-steroid era when baseball was as much a passion as a pastime-and when race was often still a factor-to focus on decisions made in the courtrooms rather than the dugouts. Flood claimed that the prevailing system was illegal because it violated the Sherman antitrust laws by allowing teams to monopolize the sport in a way that impeded players' freedom and financial gain-and was even unconstitutional because it, in effect, imposed a form of slavery. Baseball owners countered that players owed their success to the reserve system because it maintained competitive balance among teams and heightened interest in the game, which helped fund their high salaries. Although the Supreme Court ruled against Flood, it left the door open to legislation that would remove baseball's special exemption from antitrust regulation and to future collective bargaining. With its credibility enhanced, the players' union continued negotiations until it finally won a version of free agency very similar to Flood's, with his final vindication coming in the form of the Curt Flood Act of 1998. In replaying the confrontation between Flood and baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn, Goldman demonstrates that even a lost lawsuit, with its game-like competition, can be a landmark. And by telling the inside story of the case, he highlights a key labor relations issue in America's most popular sport. Concise and balanced, and written in a fast-paced narrative style, One Man Out reminds students, general readers, and fans that Flood holds a unique and important place in both baseball and American law.

One Man Out: Curt Flood versus Baseball (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

When Curt Flood, all-star center fielder for the St. Louis Cardinals, refused to be traded to the Philadelphia Phillies in 1968, he sent shock waves throughout professional baseball that ultimately reached the Supreme Court. Flood challenged the game's reserve clause system that bound players to teams as if they were property; and while others had previously spoken out against this arrangement, protected by Congress and the courts for a century, he was the first to pursue his grievance as doggedly or as far. Robert Goldman now offers a new look at Flood's efforts to shake the foundations of major league baseball. One Man Out takes readers back to the pre-steroid era when baseball was as much a passion as a pastime-and when race was often still a factor-to focus on decisions made in the courtrooms rather than the dugouts. Flood claimed that the prevailing system was illegal because it violated the Sherman antitrust laws by allowing teams to monopolize the sport in a way that impeded players' freedom and financial gain-and was even unconstitutional because it, in effect, imposed a form of slavery. Baseball owners countered that players owed their success to the reserve system because it maintained competitive balance among teams and heightened interest in the game, which helped fund their high salaries. Although the Supreme Court ruled against Flood, it left the door open to legislation that would remove baseball's special exemption from antitrust regulation and to future collective bargaining. With its credibility enhanced, the players' union continued negotiations until it finally won a version of free agency very similar to Flood's, with his final vindication coming in the form of the Curt Flood Act of 1998. In replaying the confrontation between Flood and baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn, Goldman demonstrates that even a lost lawsuit, with its game-like competition, can be a landmark. And by telling the inside story of the case, he highlights a key labor relations issue in America's most popular sport. Concise and balanced, and written in a fast-paced narrative style, One Man Out reminds students, general readers, and fans that Flood holds a unique and important place in both baseball and American law.

West Nile virus, mad cow disease, hepatitis A, B, and C, Ebola, smallpox -- these frightening health conditions have become part of our lexicon. But do you know how to protect yourself and your family against them? And what about the other parasitic, bacterial, fungal, or viral infections nearly seventy-five percent of Americans suffer from that can stump even the most astute doctors? Infection Protection is your personal guide to battling the new and ages-old germs that lurk in every corner of our planet and result in infections, often misdiagnosed, that can make you dangerously ill -- and may even kill you. You'll learn how to protect your body, your home, your food, your environment, and even your pets by implementing anti-infection remedies. From the proper method of washing your hands and food to traveling safely, from taking proper vitamins and dietary supplements to responding to a biological attack, this book covers the full spectrum of medical practices. With this indispensable guide in hand, you'll have the tools to strengthen your immunesystem, detoxify your body, heal faster, and significantly improve your energy and longevity.

Infection Protection: How to Fight the Germs That Make You Sick

Klatz, Ronald

Cebula, Catherine

Health, Fitness & Dieting

Diane Pub Co.

See the best price to sell, buy, or rent books by Goldman, Robert M.. BookScouter helps to compare book prices from 25+ online bookstores and 30+ buyback vendors with a single search.

Books by Goldman, Robert M.

See the best price to sell, buy, or rent books by Goldman, Robert M.. BookScouter helps to compare book prices from 25+ online bookstores and 30+ buyback vendors with a single search.

Reconstruction and Black Suffrage: Losing the Vote in Reese and Cruikshank

Reconstruction and Black Suffrage: Losing the Vote in Reese and Cruikshank

One Man Out: Curt Flood versus Baseball (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

One Man Out: Curt Flood versus Baseball (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

Infection Protection: How to Fight the Germs That Make You Sick