Did Business Ever Want Jim Crow? I think not

My earlier post, “Dinner at Dale’s,” was about my surprise experience at Dale’s Steakhouse a few days after passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Dale had new customers and seemed to be happy about it. In the days and months that followed, the whole community adjusted quickly and smoothly to the new rules. It was as if nothing new had occurred, black and white children playing in the same parks, blacks and whites dining peacefully together in restaurants - in Alabama - in 1964.

Thinking back on it made me wonder if other businesses also welcomed the end of Jim Crow segregation laws. After all, businesses exist to make profits, whether or not business owners hold racist views. So perhaps business never wanted Jim Crow.

Some people, especially libertarians, oppose the Act’s ban on racial segregation in privately owned public accommodations. They believe that it violates private property rights that are protected by the constitution. But Jim Crows laws, enacted by state and local governments, required businesses to segregate based on race, against their better business judgment. Was that not a violation of their property rights?

When Jim Crow laws were being proposed, many business owners opposed them in the legislatures. But the laws were passed anyway because Black Americans, who were denied the right to vote, did not count politically. Therefore a small, active minority of whites could have its way with lawmakers, as the majority of whites simply remained silent. Even after passage, some business owners refused to enforce the new rules until they were threatened with jail.

In the Plessy vs. Ferguson case, the Supreme Court ruled that state laws requiring racial segregation in publicly available facilities were constitutional. Louisiana’s Separate Car Act (1890), required that black patrons and white patrons be seated in separate rail cars. Homer Plessy, a black man, had violated the law by boarding a “white’s only” car and was arrested. The railway company opposed the law, saying it would require the purchase of additional rail cars. The company fought the law in the legislature and the courts, but was unsuccessful.

The Plessy ruling created the “separate but equal” doctrine and gave new impetus to the enactment of racial segregation laws in several states. The Civil Rights Act Public Accommodations Provision invalidated those laws, apparently to the delight of many, if not most, private owners of public accommodations.

For future posts:

How did business issues affect the Montgomery Bus Boycott?

What was the real political impact of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Why do I write this stuff?