The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America

The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America, Richard Rothstein Liveright Publishing Corporation 2017This is a very detailed, interesting and tragic account of how Federal, state and local governments perpetuated and imposed residential segregation from at least the early 20th century. The key point that the author makes is that most of De Facto segregation is actually De Jure segregation. As the Post-Reconstruction South imposed Jim Crow , the Federal government and states and localities in the North, were enforcing their own segregation policies. The author largely rejects the whole distinction between De Facto and De Jure apartheid.The author almost only discusses residential segregation. This means that the Southern legal policies that created separate Black and white restaurants , water fountains etc. are not addressed. He therefore underemphasizes the difference between the North and the South. In the North, similar policies were often carried out by private actors while in the South these were written in law.The distinction between North and South is often overemphasized so this is a useful corrective. The stress on De Jure action by Federal and Northern governments is important and very well taken ! The excuse often given was the need for community harmony. Yet relatively integrated “slums” were often cleared to make way for segregated housing. The author notes that private bigoted action including physical attacks was often the back up to public policy.The Democratic Party’s reputation is skewered in this account. From Woodrow Wilson to FDR and beyond, Federal policies specifically reinforced legal apartheid. The FHA had specific pro-segregation policies. Much of home lending required FHA support. This meant that it was impossible to get loans for Black people to move into white areas. The only exception was conscious block busting by real estate agents.Local racist zoning policies were outlawed by the Supreme Court in 1917. The ground for this was the freedom to contract---not anti-racism! It went along with other decisions outlawing minimum wages, etc. Local governments often found ways around the decision. They also began to shift to economic zoning—single family only, size of lots etc.aThe author also explains the role of the police in enforcing racist laws. They allowed mobs to physically attack Black families moving into white areas. They also enforced racist covenants by evicting Black families that violated the covenants.One effect of all this was concentration of wealth and income among whites. Rothstein explains this in some detail. Whites could build wealth after WWI by buying in the white only suburbs with VA and FHA loans. Blacks could not , so never build equity at the rate that whites did.In order to win U.S. workers from support of Bolshevism, the U.S. government engaged in a major campaign to encourage home ownership. There were 2 million posters put out etc. This was a slow roll-out. At first buyers were only given mortgages that did not build equity and had to be paid off in a few years. A shift toward the current form took place in the 30’s . In all cases, restrictions made it harder for Black families.Overall, this book is an excellent contribution to our understanding of institutional racism in the U.S. The contrast between North and South though real in certain respects has long been over-emphasized. Institutional racism is an AMERICAN problem, not a Southern problem alone. The U.S. ruling class endorsed racism from the end of Reconstruction onward. The forms used in different in different areas but the overall program was similar. The potential of the unity of poor Blacks and whites had to be eliminated . In the South this was done with Jim Crow. In the North ,it was done with segregation.The author’s politics are liberal. This comes across strongly. He stresses that the real problem with segregation is that it violates the U.S. constitution. He advances other moral considerations but constitutionalism is the key one. Of course this is contradictory. The U.S. constitution enshrined an unequal racial order. Even the 13th amendment which ended slavery consolidated slavery through the criminal injustice system. The 14th amendment has been interpreted in different ways. The structure of the constitution with its Senate, Electoral College, judicial and presidential veto, exclusion of immigrants and felons from voting etc. is inherently racist and undemocratic. Further, the constitution was founded on the expulsion, dispossession and genocide of native people. We cannot logically base anti-racism on constitutionalism.Related to this is the author’s acceptance of the capitalist system. While favoring measures to improve opportunities and even transferring some wealth, he strongly accepts the current class divisions. He stresses the needs of middle class Blacks. He favors the right of poor Blacks to become middle class, but accepts the existence of the middle class. Of course he defines class on an income basis. In spite of this, his explanation of and attack on the concentration of wealth is important.Beyond this, the weakest political point in the book is its exclusion of other BIPOC groups. He doesn’t discuss Natives . He believes that the other racial groups will assimilate over time as did European ethnic groups. He downplays the effect on racism on Latinos compared to Blacks. Yet the laws and covenants he discusses exclude ALL who are not “Caucasian”. It is true that due to the role of slavery in the foundation of U.S. wealth , that Blacks have historically been the largest BIPOC group and most spread across the U.S. , Blacks have been central economically and politically. However, his downplay of other groups is misplaced.Finally, the centrality on integration is a bit off. The problem with segregation is that it was a policy for the enforcement of oppression. What needs to be ended is oppression. Some of his proposals for what amount to reparations are very useful. The ones that just promote integration are less. He notes that the reforms are unlikely to be passed. Education is the key to changing political realities he feels.Because of his liberal politics, he doesn’t consider the real solution to institutional racism: a socialist revolution that will center the fight against exploitation and class division. To be successful, this movement will have to bring the fight against oppression to the very center of the struggle.In spite of the limitations of the author’s liberal politics, the documentation of institutional racism in the North and West is VERY important and needs to be widely understood !

Wow. This book was just... wow. Incredibly insightful. First off, it's called 'The Color of Law,' but it deals specifically with the geographical segregation of black and white America, not just systemic sociopolitical segregation. I was expecting something more akin to The New Jim Crow where it delves deeply into a wide array of legal systems that keep people oppressed, but this book is very localized to geographical/location based segregation and real estate discrimination. It's still fascinating, I just wasn't expecting it.That being said, I truly don't think this book could accurately cover each topic adequately if it tried to research other subjects, with how expansive the history of segregated real estate is. The author goes into great detail, starting at the very beginning (though focusing a lot on mid-century to early 2000s) on how the government has structured its states and localities in such a way that prevents comingling and integration. He addresses each and every facet of this issue in depth- from natural migration, zoning law, discriminatory practices, deed provisions, and more. He uses a combination of objective law discussion and illustrative examples of these laws in practice with interviews of the people who dealt with them. It's an in-depth book, and my only complaint is there wasn't more, because I really feel like he could have gone into even more detail, and shared even more examples. But even so, it was a really insightful book and a quick read. The language is easy to digest, and it doesn't take long to click in with the legal jargon. Definitely a must read for those curious about institutionalized racism and how it came to be.

Loved this book. Learned so much about communities I am familiar with in addition to overall history. Race is in everything in this country and the denial only goes so far when you look at the actual law.