Balkinization |
Balkinization
Balkinization Symposiums: A Continuing List E-mail: Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu David Luban david.luban at gmail.com Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu K. Sabeel Rahman sabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu Compendium of posts on Hobby Lobby and related cases The Anti-Torture Memos: Balkinization Posts on Torture, Interrogation, Detention, War Powers, and OLC The Anti-Torture Memos (arranged by topic) Recent Posts Loving Day, 2020: Revisiting Palmore v. Sidoti as a Companion Case to Loving v. Virginia
|
Friday, June 12, 2020
Loving Day, 2020: Revisiting Palmore v. Sidoti as a Companion Case to Loving v. Virginia
Linda McClain
June 12th is Loving Day, a holiday celebrating the landmark case Loving v. Virginia (1967), in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act— and the laws of 15 other states that still prohibited marriage between white people and people of other “races” — as unconstitutional and “obviously an endorsement of the doctrine of White Supremacy.” Officially recognized in several states (including Virginia) and some cities, the holiday “Loving Day” grew out of a graduate school project undertaken by designer Ken Tanabe, whose own interracial heritage spurred his interest in the case. This year, Tanabe has asked that people continue the tradition “of observing Loving Day in meaningful and personal ways” but also “by joining us in coming together in support of black lives and justice." The Loving Day website, with the message, “Black Lives Matter,” makes a similar request and lists ways to do so.
Peter Wallenstein, author of two books about
the Lovings and their significant case, has commented that the murder of George
Floyd “epitomizes how half a century after the
Loving decision and other civil rights milestones of the 60's ‘the toxic
residue of Jim Crow across the centuries continues to make its way
down the streets and into people's lives.’" Wallenstein adds: "It
really is quite remarkable how much can change and it’s just as remarkable how
little does."
Wallenstein’s observation about how much and how little changes
comes to mind in considering another significant Supreme Court case about
impermissible race discrimination and family life, Palmore v. Sidoti (1984). Decided seventeen years after Loving, it shows the disturbing persistence
of racial prejudice in the form of hostility toward interracial marriage. Palmore is a significant
companion case to Loving in taking up
some of Loving’s unfinished business.
But unlike Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving, whose love story and legal victory
in the aptly named case have become iconic cultural references and given birth
to a holiday, Palmore did not produce
a similar happy ending for Linda Sidoti Palmore and her family.
I recently revisited Palmore to write a chapter about it for a forthcoming book, Painting Constitutional Law (edited by Howard Wasserman and M.C. Mirow) about important Supreme Court cases that originated in Florida. The book’s inspiration was a series of paintings about such cases, May It Please the Court, by the Florida artist Xavier Cortada. In Cortada’s painting about Palmore v. Sidoti, a cloud of disembodied and disapproving eyes hovers behind three figures forming a family tableau at the center: Linda Sidoti Palmore, a white mother, holds onto her young daughter, Melanie, who in turn holds the hand of Charles Palmore, an African American man, Linda’s new husband. As Cortada writes of his painting, those eyes “in a sea of Caucasian skin” —and the “profound racism” they reflected—tried to tip the balance in a custody battle. Melanie’s white father, Anthony Sidoti, disapproved of her mother’s interracial relationship and persuaded a trial court to transfer custody to him because of the “social stigmatization” Melanie would surely suffer, despite “strides” in race relations. The Supreme Court reversed, famously declaring that “private biases may be outside the reach of the law, but the law cannot, directly or indirectly, give them effect.” This often-quoted language has had a long afterlife in many constitutional battles against discrimination, including for LGBTQ rights. Cortada celebrates Linda Sidoti Palmore’s seeming legal triumph by showing the interracial family striding forward despite the disapproving eyes. The reported case, however, does not tell the full story. Despite her legal victory, as many family law and constitutional law professors know, she never regained custody of her child. And, as I learned in reading newspaper accounts about the case, her marriage to Charles Palmore was troubled and brief and ended while her efforts to regain custody continued. The judgmental eyes that Cortada depicts achieved the initial disruption of Linda’s family tableau he depicts. The blind eye the Supreme Court turned to her requests for the return of her daughter while she pursued her constitutional claim continued that disruption, and state court judges then aided her ex-husband’s legal maneuverings to keep Melanie. Despite the Court’s inspiring rhetoric about not giving effect to “private biases,” such biases did have a disruptive and disturbing “effect.” In contrast with Cortada’s painting, the more typical family tableau was one of absence – with Melanie present only as a photograph at which Linda, seated next to Charles, gazes. Understandably, Linda Sidoti Palmore believed she had a right to marry without punishment. However, Melissa Murray has written that, in the years after Loving and before Palmore, a number of white women lost custody of their children after they entered into an interracial romance, although courts often tried to mask the role played by the racial element. The trial court judge in Palmore, Judge Buck, made no such effort, but made his race-conscious reasoning clear. Following that ruling, Linda observed in Florida Today: ‘The first time I was before Judge Buck he thought I was a terrific lady. Then his whole opinion changed and I was not good. It was because I loved a black man. I hadn’t changed. Neither had my love for my daughter.’
The
Palmore marriage was legal in Florida —following Loving’s rejection of antimiscegenation laws; that did not mean it
was socially acceptable. In 1982, Ernest Porterfield, author of one of the
first ethnographic studies of black-white marriages, observed that ‘no other
[intermarriage] mixture touches off such widespread condemnation as black-white
race mixing.’ News coverage of the time reveals that, even as the number of
such ‘mixed’ couples was on the rise, problems of prejudice and lack of
acceptance – particularly by the white community – had not decreased.
Since I had been researching the role of the rhetoric of bigotry
in controversies over Brown v. Board of
Education and Loving, I was interested
to see whether and how such rhetoric featured in the Palmore litigation. As I elaborate in the chapter, the ACLU reminded
the Supreme Court of its numerous civil rights-era cases in which it had
‘refused to hold constitutional values hostage to racial bigotry in any form’
or be ‘pressured into race conscious decisions by the reprehensible actions of
a small minority of bigots.’ A brief filed by Leigh Earls, a white child raised
in an interracial home, spoke of the positive effects from her experience being
raised by her white mother and black stepfather. She expressed her concern that
if courts were allowed to ‘to presume that an interracial home is detrimental
to the interests of a white child, she could [have been] taken from her home.’ Earls’ brief, joined by several civil rights
and children rights organizations, discussed family law cases rejecting Judge
Buck’s reliance on the assumed prejudice and stigma Melanie would encounter:
‘“a court must never yield to
prejudice because it cannot prevent
prejudice.”’ Earls cited a California case from 1968 (DeLander v. DeLander) for the proposition that ‘“[w]hile the
Constitution cannot prevent bigotry, it
can prevent an individual from involving the State, through its Courts, in such
bigotry.’” The Supreme Court’s eventual opinion in Palmore would mirror this declaration closely, although
substituting ‘private bias’ and ‘prejudice’ for
‘bigotry.’
To
return to 2020 and Loving Day: Public
opinion is more favorable toward interracial marriage than it was in the 1980s,
when the custody dispute over Melanie Sidoti arose. The gaze cast on such
families is more approving, although not uniformly so. Also, some gazes may
fail to see interracial or multiracial families as families, making them
invisible, not just too visible, as Dean Onwuachi-Willig and Jacob Willig-Onwuachi have observed. Another encouraging trend is that the share of intermarried
couples has grown steadily since 1980, when just three percent of married
people had a spouse of a different race or ethnicity. A survey released in 2017, on the 50th anniversary of Loving,
found that one in six new marriages in the United States crosses racial or
ethnic lines, although the white-black line is crossed less frequently than
other lines, such as white-Asian, white-Latinx, or other combinations.
In
a book published on Loving’s 50th anniversary, Loving: Interracial Intimacy in America and the Threat to White Supremacy, Sheryll Cashin concludes with a call to be raciall and
culturally “dexterous.” Cashin’s message seems apt today. “We are in a state of
toxic polarity now,” Cashin wrote, but she looked forward to a future “tipping
point at which a critical mass, though not a majority, of white people accepts
that structural change and sharing power is what rejecting supremacy, with its
embedded notions of white cultural and political dominance, actually means and
requires.” (Here Cashin invoked Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who, in 1967,
referred to the “millions who have morally risen above prevailing prejudices”
and were “willing to share power and to accept structural alterations of
society even at the cost of traditional privilege.”) As Cashin observes, there
was not a majority of such “culturally dexterous, other-regarding souls” in
1967, nor were there in 2017. In recent weeks, the diversity of voices
protesting police brutality in the death of George Floyd and other people of
color and demanding an end to systemic racism suggests progress toward such a
majority.
Cashin
predicted that one positive future trend contributing to such dexterity would
be the dramatic growth in interracial intimacy, both in authentic friendships
and in family relationships. Loving and
Palmore both attacked
unconstitutional obstacles to such intimacy, even though Linda Sidoti Palmore’s
legal victory proved hollow.
Posted 3:49 PM by Linda McClain [link]
|
Books by Balkinization Bloggers ![]() Linda C. McClain and Aziza Ahmed, The Routledge Companion to Gender and COVID-19 (Routledge, 2024) ![]() David Pozen, The Constitution of the War on Drugs (Oxford University Press, 2024) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Memory and Authority: The Uses of History in Constitutional Interpretation (Yale University Press, 2024) ![]() Mark A. Graber, Punish Treason, Reward Loyalty: The Forgotten Goals of Constitutional Reform after the Civil War (University of Kansas Press, 2023) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision - Revised Edition (NYU Press, 2023) ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Burning Down the House: How Libertarian Philosophy Was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed (St. Martin’s Press, 2022) ![]() Gerard N. Magliocca, Washington's Heir: The Life of Justice Bushrod Washington (Oxford University Press, 2022) ![]() Joseph Fishkin and William E. Forbath, The Anti-Oligarchy Constitution: Reconstructing the Economic Foundations of American Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2022) Mark Tushnet and Bojan Bugaric, Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism (Oxford University Press 2021). ![]() Mark Philip Bradley and Mary L. Dudziak, eds., Making the Forever War: Marilyn B. Young on the Culture and Politics of American Militarism Culture and Politics in the Cold War and Beyond (University of Massachusetts Press, 2021). ![]() Jack M. Balkin, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Same-Sex Marriage Decision (Yale University Press, 2020) ![]() Frank Pasquale, New Laws of Robotics: Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI (Belknap Press, 2020) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, The Cycles of Constitutional Time (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Mark Tushnet, Taking Back the Constitution: Activist Judges and the Next Age of American Law (Yale University Press 2020). ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty?: The Unnecessary Conflict (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Ezekiel J Emanuel and Abbe R. Gluck, The Trillion Dollar Revolution: How the Affordable Care Act Transformed Politics, Law, and Health Care in America (PublicAffairs, 2020) ![]() Linda C. McClain, Who's the Bigot?: Learning from Conflicts over Marriage and Civil Rights Law (Oxford University Press, 2020) ![]() Sanford Levinson and Jack M. Balkin, Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Written in Stone: Public Monuments in Changing Societies (Duke University Press 2018) ![]() Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, eds., Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press 2018) ![]() Gerard Magliocca, The Heart of the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights became the Bill of Rights (Oxford University Press, 2018) ![]() Cynthia Levinson and Sanford Levinson, Fault Lines in the Constitution: The Framers, Their Fights, and the Flaws that Affect Us Today (Peachtree Publishers, 2017) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, A Realistic Theory of Law (Cambridge University Press 2017) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Nullification and Secession in Modern Constitutional Thought (University Press of Kansas 2016) ![]() Sanford Levinson, An Argument Open to All: Reading The Federalist in the 21st Century (Yale University Press 2015) ![]() Stephen M. Griffin, Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015) ![]() Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015) ![]() Bruce Ackerman, We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2014) Balkinization Symposium on We the People, Volume 3: The Civil Rights Revolution ![]() Joseph Fishkin, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity (Oxford University Press, 2014) ![]() Mark A. Graber, A New Introduction to American Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2013) ![]() John Mikhail, Elements of Moral Cognition: Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment (Cambridge University Press, 2013) ![]() Gerard N. Magliocca, American Founding Son: John Bingham and the Invention of the Fourteenth Amendment (New York University Press, 2013) ![]() Stephen M. Griffin, Long Wars and the Constitution (Harvard University Press, 2013) Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013) ![]() James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012) ![]() Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012) ![]() Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012) ![]() Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011) ![]() Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011) ![]() Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011) ![]() Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011) ![]() Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010) ![]() Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic ![]() Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010) ![]() Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010) Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009) ![]() Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009) ![]() Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009) ![]() Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009) Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009) ![]() Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) ![]() David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) ![]() Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007) ![]() Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007) ![]() Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006) ![]() Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006) Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006) Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006) Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006) Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005) Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |