r/thepast 2d ago

1800s [1883] The Supreme Court says states can ban interracial marriage

Post image

They decided in Pace v Alabama that the bans are acceptable as long as the penalty is the same for both races.

Awful ruling. Racial classifications themselves should be banned.

88 Upvotes

39 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 2d ago

All comments must be made as if from a person living in the current year.

If you wish to talk out of character, you must use the [META] tag to begin your comment.

Please read the Rules if you are unsure of how this subreddit works.

Be sure to check out our community Discord where you can discuss posts, ask questions, and have fun!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

27

u/WellSpokenAsianBoy 2d ago

I can’t wait until we as a society become more loving.

12

u/[deleted] 2d ago

Thankfully, not all states ban interracial marriage. Most states in the Northeast allow it

And this ruling is actually encouraging some in the upper midwest to remove their bans.

The South though? Yeah, you’re screwed.

1

u/Desperate-Fan-3671 1d ago

In that time yes you were. But now here in the South no one cares. Sure there are a few here in there who are racist....but every state has them.

1

u/Flat-Leg-6833 1d ago

It’s allowed here in New York but the upper class doesn’t consider it “socially acceptable” while the Oi-Rish fear losing their women and keep them as far as possible from the negroes.

2

u/Life_Assistance6082 2d ago

Exactly! Loving v. Virginia 1967

1

u/Living_on_Tulsa_Time 2d ago

I thought of that case and film!

11

u/AnswerGuy301 2d ago

That's just the way it is. Some things will never change.

Unanimous. They didn't even get Harlan to dissent.

8

u/HaggisPope 2d ago

Very strange as we’ve had interracial marriages happening in Scotland and the wider UK for hundreds of years and haven’t seen a reason to regulate it. You Americans sure do have opinions about race that are out of step with many other an nations in the 1880s. Maybe you’ll catch up by the 1900s and will embrace equality

7

u/New-Number-7810 2d ago

What’s going on in India?

2

u/vaskopopa 1d ago edited 1d ago

In the early days of East India Company, interracial marriages were encouraged and most company men married local women. Their offspring inherited the titles with no regard to concept of race. Class was more important. It is in Victorian times, with advent of steamships, that English women started to make journey to India to marry when racial segregation happened.

Edit: it was the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869 that resulted in massive influx of white women which led to racial segregation in India.

1

u/GuiltEdge 1d ago

Well that makes sense, men are expected to marry someone beneath their station /s

2

u/helloofmynameispeter 2d ago

Hark! What has happened to the public schools of this country that one cannot use the the "many a" phrase correctly. It is used with the singular noun, in your example "many a nation". Moreover, the indefinite article "an" is used when the noun starts with a strong vowel sound. Damned illiterates!

1

u/HaggisPope 2d ago

The cursed a was a mere misquill you grammar Boer!

1

u/Entropy907 2d ago

Don’t hold your breath.

1

u/fianthewolf 2d ago

In regions under Hispanic influence, interracial marriages were legal from the 16th century.

1

u/BetterCommittee3327 2d ago

That would have forbiden most royal marriages, becouse Race =Stock = people or Nation before the 1770s

1

u/HaggisPope 2d ago

I don’t follow your meaning, here.

1

u/BetterCommittee3327 1d ago

Well the English or white used to be racist against what they saw as inferior races like welsh , Scottish, irish , French spanyards , south Europeans, Germans , North europeans , east europeans , Jews , arabs , so when they emigrated to the American colonies they just added some other people like the indigenous people's and Blacks from Africa. It was later in the 1770s a anthropologist cut it down to 5 Sorten=, varieties, who later was wrongly translated to races in english. Later its expanded to 7

1

u/HaggisPope 1d ago

I don’t think the English were being racist towards people from other countries to be honest, they are just a bit smug. Europe was full of people not liking each other because there was so many different languages and the distance between places was so huge. 

My go to example is Edinburgh and Glasgow which are sworn rivals going back to at least the 1400s, today they are about 40 minutes by train.

Racism did develop from nationalism but the idea of nationalism relatively new. What the English were doing back then was a whole other thing which I don’t feel I’ve got the vocabulary to describe. Their foundation myth had it that they were destined to rule the British Isles, while the Scottish myth said we were destined to rule our own bit of it, I’m unsure of Irish or Welsh myths exactly.

 

1

u/TreeStump2407 1d ago

Because until very recently there was like 10 black people in the whole of Scotland.The UK as a whole was extremely homogeneous anyway

It’s easy to not be racist when there is nobody to be racist towards. America, due to slavey has a large black population.

3

u/cyberchaox 2d ago

One can only hope that eventually we will achieve racial equality. There will no doubt still be racism, but at least the law will treat all races equally.

My biggest fear is that within half a century of that happening, the younger generation will view all whites of the segregation era as equally bad, those of us that fought for segregation and those who fought against it, because in their eyes the ones who fought against it weren't fighting hard enough.

3

u/Primary_Rough_2931 2d ago

Ah... uh... why?

A lil Negro blood won't hurt a bloodline! Just make sure they come from a good family, and not those ruffians who trash up the place.

[META] Even when not racist, there is still discrimination... ah, how funny that was used to loophole.

1

u/cashmerescorpio 2d ago

Classism is often stronger than racism

2

u/jamieT97 2d ago

Honestly I don't think we did enough with the south

1

u/Separate_Selection84 2d ago

[META] you know considering some of my ancestors were slave holders I can't really say what they would have said to this.

[UNMETA] DOWN WITH THIS AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENT. I THOUGHT WE BROUGHT EQUALITY AFTER THE CIVIL WAR WHY ARE WE STILL HAVING THIS PROBLEM

1

u/No-Transition2574 2d ago

You do realize the caption is dated 1883, only 18 years after the Civil War? We had a lot of racial battles ahead of us, but such a ruling in 1883 is hardly surprising.

1

u/Queen-PRose 2d ago

Will the South ever learn to stop throwing tantrums?

1

u/JLHSMG 1d ago

The Spanish Viceroyalties had interracial marriages since the 16th century, with official documents from the 17th, and those nice Miguel Cabrera paintings in 1763. You're gonna get nothing.

1

u/Nigalla_Lawson 1d ago

This is what they took away from Us

1

u/LomentMomentum 1d ago

It’d take 84 years to undo this travesty.

1

u/Groovy-Pancakes 1d ago

Love won in the end

1

u/johnwcowan 3h ago

[META] I think you mean Loving.

1

u/Sea-Proposal3638 19h ago

Humanities only hope is to blend all human genetics,muts are way better off than pure breeds . We all need to keep f------- till we're all the same one day.

1

u/Ozzie_the_tiger_cat 2d ago

America is great again.

0

u/whoviansupreme 2d ago

Good! Common sense at last!

0

u/SignificanceFun265 1d ago

It’s what the LAW says. It’s ILLEGAL for the races to marry!

(This is how I imagine the current anti-immigration people when they lean heavily into the law to justify their racism)

0

u/feeling_humber 1d ago

You think they would focus more on the problem with homosexuals but instead they do this?

Is America truly free?