Litigation victories alone could not change entrenched voting discrimination

Evidence

From the start, it had a strong legal arm. The NAACP defended black rights in court; it also tried to expand those rights through lawsuits. Not all these lawsuits were successful, but some were, and spectacularly so. In Guinn v. United States (1915), the NAACP took part in the fight against Oklahoma’s grandfather clause and won the case. But even victories in the courts did not produce real change in race relations. Southern states, despite cases like Guinn, had plenty of ways to keep blacks out of the voting booth. The U.S. Civil Rights Commission, in a report issued in 1961, found sixteen counties in the Deep South in which not a single black was registered to vote, even though blacks were a majority in these counties. — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law, 1384

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Protest alone cannot permanently eradicate racial discrimination because interests shift — Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning: The…, 1259; Winning a landmark legal ruling does not guarantee winning the underlying case — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law: An Introduction, 1905; Blinding audits cannot undo accumulated experiential advantages from past discrimination. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 257

Broader Connections

• Protest alone cannot permanently eradicate racial discrimination because interests shift #expands (0.85) — Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning, 1259
• Winning a landmark legal ruling does not guarantee winning the underlying case #expands (0.82) — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law, 1905