While playing Trivial Pursuit recently, there was a question, what state was the last to ratify the 13th amendment, outlawing slavery, in 1995? The answer was South Carolina. I’m curious, if this is true, does that mean that before that you could legally own slaves in South Carolina. Also, how did the morons manage to dodge the issue for so long?
Once 3/4 of the states ratify any amendment it’s in the Constitution. It then applies to all the States. It doesn’t matter if your State didn’t ratify it. Unless you believe in nullification and secession and stuff like that.
Some states didn’t ratify the Bill of Rights until the 20th Century. Why? Because they didn’t ratify it back in the 18th Century.
No, it wasn’t legal to own slaves in SC until 1995 – the federal law took precedence over the state law. (There is a term for this that I can’t remember.) Once the amendment was ratified (December 1965, I believe), slavery was illegal in the U.S. State ratification after that point was symbolic (in both good and bad ways). Similarly, Mississippi did not repeal its anti-miscegenation law until this year even though the U.S. Supreme Court had already declared these laws unconstitutional in 1967.
Ok thanks.
Once 3/4s have ratified it, then why bother holding out? All you do is look bad with something as universally despised as slavery? Must be all that imbreeding that goes on in those parts, right (as far as politicans go at least.)
Along the same lines, whats up with the 22nd amendment? Why can’t people choose their president regardless of how many terms he’s served?
Uh, make that December 1865.
Onces 3/4s have ratified it, why bother ratifying it? It applies to you just as much whether you do or not, so why waste the time and money to put it to a vote?
Why can’t people elect a president who is from another country, or under 35 years old?
If you want it changed, lobby for an amendment to repeal that amendment. Once it is in the constitution, that’s the way it is until you change it.
South Carolina? I thought it was Mississippi.
I have a book by Michael Moore that summarizes some of the best TV Nation bits. One particular bit was done right after someone discovered that Mississippi never ratified the 13th amendment, but before it was officially ratified. They had one of the show’s black correspondents place an ad in a local paper asking for slaves. The guy had the slaves (all white guys) go around taking out the correspondent’s trash, mowing his lawn and stuff while he sat on the lawn drinking mint juleps. IIRC he also paraded his shackled slaves around town and even gave them all slave names “Bob Billy Bob” “Joe Billy Bob” “Newt Billy Bob”, etc. After the amendment was ratified, he set the slaves free.
I’ll check the book when I get home, but I coulda sworn it took place in Mississippi…
[Edited by Alphagene on 12-21-2000 at 03:28 PM]
I’m surprised that SC didn’t ratify it during the Reconstruction, given the complexion of the legislature at that time. The classic movie Birth of a Nation presents an excellent portrait of the SC legislature at that time.
South Carolina ratified the 13th Amendment on November 13, 1865. Georgia was the state that made it official December 6, 1865.
According to this site http://www.law.emory.edu/FEDERAL/usconst/amend.html
Kentucky was the last state to ratify the amendment, in 1976. Mississippi hadn’t ratified the amendment at the time the above site was put together.
It would seem trivial pursuit was wrong then. I think I have a good case against Milton Bradley or whoever makes that game. Hahaha $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
That is an extremely important thing to know to achieve success on these boards!
Congressman Barney Frank has recently introduced legislation to do just that. It was referred to committee last I saw. I was curious a couple days ago what my state’s congressional delegation was up to, and that was near the top of the list. If you want to lobby your congressman to support the bill, I can look it up again if you like.
C’mon Dopers, you’re letting keyboard boy off way too lightly, I had put him/her on my Xmas list for a pair of asbestos underwear. The correct date for SC’s ratification has been posted. A few other facts you should think about. I’m choosing words so as to keep this out of GD, in the desire to fight ignorance.
Qwerty, you should know that states had a little disagreement on this topic in the 1860’s. Before that, a “would-be” 13th amendment to guarantee slavery from Federal interference was passed by the United States Congress. It was ratified by two states (Ohio and Maryland) before the shooting started.
Also, when the “as we know it” 13th amendment to abolish slavery was first voted on by the House of Reps., it did not pass, even though the Southern states were not present for voting.
Despite modern feelings on the issue, slavery was hardly “universally despised” when it came to putting it in the Constitution.
Check out McPherson’s Ordeal By Fire for a good reference on stuff like this.
I
The Republicans hugely won in the Congressional elections of 1950 (a feat not repeated until 1994). They were rarin’ to punish the Democrats for having the gall to elect FDR four times in a row. So they rammed through the 22nd with the memory of FDR still fresh in their minds. That’s about all there is to it.
There was a clause in the amendment exempting the then-president from being bound by it. Truman for the rest of his days used to enjoy joking that he could always make another run if he felt like it.
I don’t think it’s that simple. After all, it did obviously get ratified by 3/4 of the states. To suggest that a Constitutional ammendment was passed due to a partisan Congress is absurd.
The ‘Supremacy Clause’?
It’s not as absurd as you accuse. The Republicans that year not only dominated Congress but lots of state legislatures too. Sort of like the past few years. Once they rammed it through Congress there were plenty of state legislators who ran with it.
This is interesting, but, of course common sense tells us that a bill won’t make much difference. They’d have to introduce a constitutional amendment.
Congress can pass any bill it wants, including pro-slavery bills. They simply won’t be valid under judicial review if they’re unconstitutional. Remember the Line item veto fiasco a few years ago?