Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0003
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 2 surfaces the history around the decision, by both the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) and the National Woman’s Party (NWP), to immediately pivot to other goals after ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. While each monitored the litigation around the validity of the Nineteenth Amendment, NAWSA and the NWP both had conventions that resulted in adoption of a new mission. The chapter looks closely at the debates among each group’s members as to what its new mission should be. It concludes that the immediate pivot of each group played a role in the Nineteenth Amendment’s less-than-robust constitutional meaning.
{"title":"Validity","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0003","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 2 surfaces the history around the decision, by both the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) and the National Woman’s Party (NWP), to immediately pivot to other goals after ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. While each monitored the litigation around the validity of the Nineteenth Amendment, NAWSA and the NWP both had conventions that resulted in adoption of a new mission. The chapter looks closely at the debates among each group’s members as to what its new mission should be. It concludes that the immediate pivot of each group played a role in the Nineteenth Amendment’s less-than-robust constitutional meaning.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"115 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124589249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0002
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 1 describes two national suffrage organizations’ efforts, in the final years prior to ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. It highlights the split between members of the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA), over whether a state-by-state approach to suffrage, or a federal suffrage amendment, was the best strategy to achieve the vote for women. That split caused Alice Paul to form a separate organization, the National Woman’s Party (NWP). The chapter foreshadows how that deep division had an impact on the constitutional development of the federal suffrage amendment, after its eventual ratification in 1920.
{"title":"Ratification","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0002","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 1 describes two national suffrage organizations’ efforts, in the final years prior to ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. It highlights the split between members of the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA), over whether a state-by-state approach to suffrage, or a federal suffrage amendment, was the best strategy to achieve the vote for women. That split caused Alice Paul to form a separate organization, the National Woman’s Party (NWP). The chapter foreshadows how that deep division had an impact on the constitutional development of the federal suffrage amendment, after its eventual ratification in 1920.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"247 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122920199","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0007
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 6 considers the same issue as Chapter 5, except within the context of the right to hold public office. Many suffragists characterized the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment as having secured their political liberty or freedom. Yet, as both Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 explain, that understanding of the meaning and scope of the Nineteenth Amendment was not shared by many state courts. Much as they had used statutory construction to limit the potential impact of the Nineteenth Amendment on women’s eligibility for jury service, many state courts embraced a constricted view of the scope of the Nineteenth Amendment on other political rights beyond voting, like holding elective or appointive office. This ensured the continuation of women’s partialized citizenship for decades after ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment.
{"title":"Voting and Holding Public Office","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0007","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 6 considers the same issue as Chapter 5, except within the context of the right to hold public office. Many suffragists characterized the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment as having secured their political liberty or freedom. Yet, as both Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 explain, that understanding of the meaning and scope of the Nineteenth Amendment was not shared by many state courts. Much as they had used statutory construction to limit the potential impact of the Nineteenth Amendment on women’s eligibility for jury service, many state courts embraced a constricted view of the scope of the Nineteenth Amendment on other political rights beyond voting, like holding elective or appointive office. This ensured the continuation of women’s partialized citizenship for decades after ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132346334","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0004
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 3 raises the issue of how race intersected with the constitutional development of the Nineteenth Amendment. It argues that the immediate pivot of the National Woman’s Party (NWP), to a federal equal rights amendment, played a significant role in the failure of enforcement legislation to be enacted by Congress. The chapter explores the fear of a “Second Reconstruction,” by white southern congressmen, as an element in that story. And it suggests that the NWP’s failure to support African American women suffragists, and white NWP members who were co-founders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), was both a moral and a strategic failing. That choice, animated by concerns around white southern political support for the proposed equal rights amendment, contributed to the failure of enforcement legislation. The chapter links the lack of such legislation to the absence of a federal judicial forum, in which to more fully develop the meaning and scope of the Nineteenth Amendment.
{"title":"Enforcement Legislation","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 3 raises the issue of how race intersected with the constitutional development of the Nineteenth Amendment. It argues that the immediate pivot of the National Woman’s Party (NWP), to a federal equal rights amendment, played a significant role in the failure of enforcement legislation to be enacted by Congress. The chapter explores the fear of a “Second Reconstruction,” by white southern congressmen, as an element in that story. And it suggests that the NWP’s failure to support African American women suffragists, and white NWP members who were co-founders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), was both a moral and a strategic failing. That choice, animated by concerns around white southern political support for the proposed equal rights amendment, contributed to the failure of enforcement legislation. The chapter links the lack of such legislation to the absence of a federal judicial forum, in which to more fully develop the meaning and scope of the Nineteenth Amendment.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131646253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0008
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 7 describes how class intersected with the Nineteenth Amendment, in the context of the United State Supreme Court’s decision in Adkins v. Children’s Hospital and the divisions over a proposed Equal Rights Amendment. It explores the NWP’s negotiations with social feminists and legal progressives, in the three years after ratification. That negotiation was focused on modifying the language of the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), to ensure that courts would not use it to strike down protective labor legislation for women. These efforts came to naught, and the “neutrality feminists” within the NWP arranged for the ERA to be introduced into Congress in 1923. Chapter 7 argues that Adkins was the high watermark for a potentially robust or “thick” interpretation of the Nineteenth Amendment. Social feminists and legal progressives feared that the ERA would be used in the same way Justice Sutherland invoked the Nineteenth Amendment in Adkins, to justify invalidating minimum wage legislation for women. One consequence of this battle over the ERA is that it has still not been ratified, one hundred years later. But, another consequence was to create a vacuum around the Nineteenth Amendment, contributing to the thin constitutional conception that emerged following ratification.
{"title":"Defining Equality","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0008","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 7 describes how class intersected with the Nineteenth Amendment, in the context of the United State Supreme Court’s decision in Adkins v. Children’s Hospital and the divisions over a proposed Equal Rights Amendment. It explores the NWP’s negotiations with social feminists and legal progressives, in the three years after ratification. That negotiation was focused on modifying the language of the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), to ensure that courts would not use it to strike down protective labor legislation for women. These efforts came to naught, and the “neutrality feminists” within the NWP arranged for the ERA to be introduced into Congress in 1923. Chapter 7 argues that Adkins was the high watermark for a potentially robust or “thick” interpretation of the Nineteenth Amendment. Social feminists and legal progressives feared that the ERA would be used in the same way Justice Sutherland invoked the Nineteenth Amendment in Adkins, to justify invalidating minimum wage legislation for women. One consequence of this battle over the ERA is that it has still not been ratified, one hundred years later. But, another consequence was to create a vacuum around the Nineteenth Amendment, contributing to the thin constitutional conception that emerged following ratification.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131664328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0006
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 5 delves into the state cases, which asked whether voting and jury service for women were coextensive. While most courts saw the Nineteenth Amendment as self-executing in terms of voting, many construed it narrowly in terms of whether its scope encompassed other political rights, beyond voting. The chapter connects the lack of congressional enforcement legislation, pursuant to the Nineteenth Amendment, to this thin conception of its scope. It suggests that the NWP and the NLWV, although they were working in other sites of reform, like state legislatures, were not much in the state courts. And it was in those courts, that there was a possibility judges could have been persuaded to adopt a robust interpretation of the Nineteenth Amendment—one that understood it to extend other political rights to women.
{"title":"Voting and Jury Service","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 5 delves into the state cases, which asked whether voting and jury service for women were coextensive. While most courts saw the Nineteenth Amendment as self-executing in terms of voting, many construed it narrowly in terms of whether its scope encompassed other political rights, beyond voting. The chapter connects the lack of congressional enforcement legislation, pursuant to the Nineteenth Amendment, to this thin conception of its scope. It suggests that the NWP and the NLWV, although they were working in other sites of reform, like state legislatures, were not much in the state courts. And it was in those courts, that there was a possibility judges could have been persuaded to adopt a robust interpretation of the Nineteenth Amendment—one that understood it to extend other political rights to women.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"30 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130493197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0009
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 8 concludes that the Nineteenth Amendment can be revitalized today, to more fully ensure women’s equality. It reviews new legal scholarship that suggests direct applications of the Nineteenth Amendment to today’s voting rights challenges. And it describes how some scholars suggest that the Nineteenth should be read together with the Fourteenth Amendment, as a normative matter, to provide a more capacious understanding of the Fourteenth, as applied to women’s rights, beyond voting. Given persistent gender inequality, and the uncertain status of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), the chapter concludes that it is worth revisiting the jurisprudential potential of the Nineteenth Amendment, at its centennial.
{"title":"The Nineteenth Amendment Today","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0009","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 8 concludes that the Nineteenth Amendment can be revitalized today, to more fully ensure women’s equality. It reviews new legal scholarship that suggests direct applications of the Nineteenth Amendment to today’s voting rights challenges. And it describes how some scholars suggest that the Nineteenth should be read together with the Fourteenth Amendment, as a normative matter, to provide a more capacious understanding of the Fourteenth, as applied to women’s rights, beyond voting. Given persistent gender inequality, and the uncertain status of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), the chapter concludes that it is worth revisiting the jurisprudential potential of the Nineteenth Amendment, at its centennial.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121142321","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-09-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0005
Paula A. Monopoli
Chapter 4 examines the state cases that were brought, after ratification, around the validity of voter petitions and elections in which women voted and around preconditions to voting, like poll taxes. Those cases gave state courts a forum to discuss the self-executing nature of the Nineteenth Amendment, in terms of its impact on existing state law. The general conclusion was that the Nineteenth Amendment was self-executing as to voting itself. But state differences in statutory and constitutional construction yielded mixed results, in terms of its actual impact on state laws around voter eligibility, including the requirement that women pay poll taxes. These cases demonstrate the broad discretion in state court judges regarding what was encompassed within “voting” as a matter of constitutional interpretation and statutory construction.
{"title":"A Self-Executing Amendment","authors":"Paula A. Monopoli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190092795.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 4 examines the state cases that were brought, after ratification, around the validity of voter petitions and elections in which women voted and around preconditions to voting, like poll taxes. Those cases gave state courts a forum to discuss the self-executing nature of the Nineteenth Amendment, in terms of its impact on existing state law. The general conclusion was that the Nineteenth Amendment was self-executing as to voting itself. But state differences in statutory and constitutional construction yielded mixed results, in terms of its actual impact on state laws around voter eligibility, including the requirement that women pay poll taxes. These cases demonstrate the broad discretion in state court judges regarding what was encompassed within “voting” as a matter of constitutional interpretation and statutory construction.","PeriodicalId":330756,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional Orphan","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133310341","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：