Northern State Civil Rights Laws

American North

Here’s an interesting excerpt from Sweet Land of Liberty about the North’s civil rights laws at the state level:

“What made northern racial barriers so frustrating was that they were sometimes as hard and fast as they were in the South but, at the same time, they could also be surprisingly and unpredictably flexible. The rules of racial engagement in the North were seldom posted. And a countervailing set of rules – state civil rights laws, many dating to the nineteenth century – promised blacks that the strong arm of the law would be on their side. By World War II, eighteen northern states had civil rights laws that forbade discrimination in public accommodations. But the exclusion of blacks from hotels, stores, restaurants, and recreation centers in the North operated in a strange gray zone, blurring distinctions between “private” and “public.” Exclusion was the consequence of private actions, sometimes backed by legal sanctions but seldom encoded strictly in law. As L.D. Riddick complained in 1944, “despite the absence of Jim Crow laws,” northern Jim Crow was widespread. Michigan, for example, had a law dating back to 1885, strengthened in 1937, forbidding discrimination by race. But when the Michigan Commission on Civil Rights issued a report in 1948, it noted the “daily humiliation” blacks faced when they were denied access to restaurants, hotels, and even stores in Michigan.”

I found this in the footnotes:

“By World War II, eighteen northern states: Those states were California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington and Wisconsin. … By 1959, six more states, all in the West, had passed laws forbidding discrimination in restaurants.”

Most racialists on the internet are unaware of this.

Not only were there no Southern-style Jim Crow laws in the North, eighteen Northern states already had civil rights laws by World War II. Most of these civil rights laws were passed in the late nineteenth century.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act only extended the North’s social system to the South through federal legislation.

Iowa: banned public accommodations segregation (1884 and 1892).

Minnesota: banned segregation in public education (1887), banned public accommodations segregation (1885, 1887, and 1895).

Wisconsin: banned segregation in public accommodations and public transportation (1895).

Michigan: banned segregation in public education (1871), banned anti-miscegenation laws (1883 and 1889), banned segregation in public accommodations (1885).

Illinois: repealed exclusion of free blacks (1865), banned segregation in public education (1874 and 1896), banned segregation in public accommodations (1885 and 1897).

Indiana: banned segregation in public education (1877), banned segregation in public accommodations (1885).

Ohio: banned segregation in public accommodations (1884), banned anti-miscegenation laws and segregation in public schools (1887).

Pennsylvania: banned railroad and streetcar segregation (1867), banned segregation in public education (1872 and 1881), banned public accommodations segregation (1887).

New Jersey: banned public school segregation (1881), banned public accommodations segregation (1884 and 1898).

New York: banned public accommodations segregation (1873, 1881, and 1895), banned school segregation (1894 and 1900).

Rhode Island: banned public education segregation (1882).

Massachusetts: banned public accommodations segregation (1865, 1866, 1885, 1893, 1895), banned public education segregation (1894).

About Hunter Wallace 12366 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. The Seville grave mtDNA matches that of his brother which means they had the same mother. Case closed. (Not that it is relevant to specious arguments about him being a Jew.)

  2. You vulgar spawn of a whoring bitch (dog).
    Your threats are as empty as your soul.

    I rightly call you a soulless creature, for your vulgar treatment of women on this board, your pontificating, and bloviating pseudo-importance. If we ever were to meet, and you dared to touch me, I’d have you arrested for assault faster than you could blink.
    Go to hell.

  3. ‘Iron sharpens iron’, the Scripture says, Rudel. I apologise now for sharpening tempers. Thanks for your useful input. I agree it is incontrovertible that the vast majority of scholars and documents support the simple answer of direct Genoese origin, and my ‘novice musings’ on the subject are really not important.

  4. Rudel, don’t waste your time getting into a piss fight with Fr. (?) John. Why demean yourself in arguing with such a vulgar, ignorant man. Besides some disagreements we have had, you impress me as a well educated and well informed person. So just give us what knowledge and opinions you have on any subject, and don’t bother with people like him.

  5. “I’d have you arrested for assault faster than you could blink.”

    After you’ve thrown the first punch what makes you think you would be healthy and fit enough to dial 911 when you were lying on the ground bleeding out?

Comments are closed.