The Slaughter House Case Analysis

During the post-American Civil War era, Reconstruction in the southern United States became an enormous priority. The key protocols of the Reconstruction process involved a focus on improving civil rights. The addition of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution on July 9, 1968, gave all citizens born on American soil equal protection of their unalienable rights without any regards to their race. Before the fighting had split the country into two, “southerners and their allies had dominated the federal government.” (Curtis 209) This gave prevention for African Americans to gain any sort of freedom in the southern states, which would eventually secede to become the Confederate States of America. Eventually, after the war, these states would slowly join the U. S. once more. However, once the damage was done, “it now seemed that the leaders of the rebellion might return to …show more content…
The first cases to do this were the Slaughter-House Cases of 1873, which declared that the Privileges and immunities of citizens guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment are those which they possess as citizens of the United States and not those which they enjoy by virtue of state citizenship. This decision meant that those privileges and immunities which heretofore rested, namely, upon the states.” (Flack 7) This lead to some controversy because it “marked the practical overthrow of the Congressional ideal for the Fourteenth Amendment within seven years after its victorious adoption…and reduced the bill of rights of section 1 to distant potentialities.” (Atherton 66-67) Along with this was the Gitlow Vs. New York, which stated that “freedoms of speech and the press were fundamental rights that were protected under the due process clause.” (Curtis 71) This interpretation was used to “protect other rights against state infringement.” (Atherton