 Omaha Grapples with its Ugly Past (2019) |
|
This article looks at the legacy of the lynching of Will Brown, featuring interviews with prominent, Black Omaha community members Preston Love and Ernie Chambers, as well as University of Nebraska-Omaha Urban studies professor, Barbara Hewins-Maroney.
|
| Ozawa v. United States (1922) |
|
The Supreme Court found in Ozawa v. United States that Japanese immigrants were not eligible for naturalization, based on a contested category of whiteness. The case considered the meaning of "free white persons" from the 1906 Naturalization Act and whether factors like assimilability should be considered. While the court determined in Ozawa that the words "white person" were meant to indicate a person of the "caucasian race," the decision in U.S. v. Thind just months later stated that the word "caucasian" was meant to refer to the "common understanding" of race and not a scientific one.
|
| Pensionado Act (1903) |
|
This act, passed in the aftermath of the Philippine–American War, established a scholarship program for Filipino people to receive an education in the U.S.
|
| Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) |
|
In Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court found that racial discrimination did not violate constitutional equal protection. This case established the principle of "separate but equal" which was overturned in 1965 by the decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
|
| Remembering a dark past, renewing resolve for the future (2019) |
|
This article from the Omaha World Herald describes Omaha's official observance of the 100-year anniversary of the lynching of Will Brown. Omaha Mayor, Jean Stothert, spoke at the commemoration calling Will Brown's lynching one of the darkest days in our history.
|
| Roberto Alvarez, et al. v. E. L. Owen, et al. (1931) |
|
This case was the first successful school desegregation case in the United States, decided fifteen years before Brown v. Board of Education. When the school board in Lemon Grove, California, attempted to build a separate school for students of Mexican origin, the court ruled that the segregation violated state laws which considered people of Mexican descent to be white.
|
| Scott Act (1888) |
|
The Scott Act rejected the guarantee of free travel for Chinese people provided by the Angell Treaty of 1880. The act stated that Chinese laborers who left the U.S. would not be able to return.
|
| Selective Service Act (1917) |
|
This act authorized the U.S. government to raise a national army through compulsory enlistment via a draft. The military was segregated at the time of World War I, and Black soldiers were mostly relegated to labor roles.
|
| Selective Training and Service Act (1940) |
|
This act authorized the U.S. government to raise a national army through compulsory enlistment via a draft. While the act prohibited discrimination based on race, the military was still segregated at the time of World War II, and Black soldiers were mostly relegated to labor roles.
|
| Seminole Agreement (1900) |
|
This congressional act ratified an agreement with the Seminole Nation concerning allotment, like enrollment and laws of descent. The second proviso established matrilineal descent of lands, money, and property for heirs.
|
| Separate schools for white and colored (1904) |
|
Acts passed by the Virginia General Assembly reflected race-neutral language of the legal code after the Civil War. Application of these statutes resulted in entrenched Jim Crow segregation.
|
| State of Nebraska, ex rel. Daniel Freeman, v. John Scheve et al. (1902) |
|
In this case, Daniel Freeman, recognized as the first homesteader under the 1862 Homestead Act, made a public grievance over the use of the Bible in a public school near Beatrice. When the teacher refused to cease using the Bible, offering prayers, and singing hymns in her classroom, Freeman took his case to the school board, who defended the teacher. He then took his case to the courts. The lower court also sided with the teacher, and he appealed the case to the Nebraska Supreme Court. The higher court found that the actions of the teacher and the school board violated the provisions in Nebraska's constitution regarding the separation of church and state. The U.S. Supreme Court did not make a similar ruling until 1962 in Engel v. Vitale.
|
| Sworn Affidavit of Alexander Harlin Regarding His Continued Enslavement Until the 1866 Treaty as Part of His Application for Enrollment as a Choctaw (1896) |
|
In this sworn affidavit, Alexander Harlin attested that he, as a "Choctaw Freedman, of African Blood," was enslaved by a Choctaw woman Sarah Harlin until the Treaty of 1866 was signed. The statement was made in support of his application for enrollment in the Choctaw Nation under the Act of June 10, 1896 which authorized the Dawes Commission to add names to existing tribal rolls.
|
| Sworn Affidavit of Jeff Franklin Regarding His Enslavement and Emancipation in the Chickasaw Nation as Part of His Application for Enrollment as a Chickasaw (1896) |
|
In this sworn affidavit, Jeff Franklin attested that he was a colored man and was enslaved by Easter Colber, a Chickasaw man until April 28th, 1866, when the Treaty of 1866 was signed. The statement was made in support of his application for enrollment in the Chickasaw Nation under the Act of June 10, 1896 which authorized the Dawes Commission to add names to existing tribal rolls. The affidavit also includes information about his continued residency in the Chickasaw Nation until the time of his application in 1896.
|
| Sworn Statement of W. L. Cochran as to the Enslavement of Margaret Clark in 1866 in Support of Her Application for Enrollment as a Choctaw (1896) |
|
In this sworn statement, W. L. Cochran attested that Margaret Clark, "an African woman," was enslaved by R. L. Cochran in the Choctaw Nation until the Treaty of 1866 was signed. The statement was made in support of Margaret Clark's application for enrollment in the Choctaw Nation under the Act of June 10, 1896 which authorized the Dawes Commission to add names to existing tribal rolls.
|
| Texas Poll Tax (1901) |
|
This poll tax law in Texas was voted on in a referendum in the 1902 election as a proposed amendment to the state constitution.
|
| The Five Civilized Tribes Act (1906) |
|
This act legislated the end of tribal enrollment in the Five Tribes, as well as the dissolution of their tribal government. However, section 28 extended tribal sovereignty for the Five Tribes for a truncated 30 days per year.
|
 The Lynching of Will Brown (1919) |
|
The day after the lynching of Will Brown, the Omaha Bee devoted the first two pages of its edition to the racial terror violence enacted by a mob of white Omahans. The articles on these pages provide different perspective of the race riot, from the crowds cheering at the destruction of government buildings, to the alleged assault victim's shock at the incident. The newspaper also featured a list of victims of the mob.
|
| The Woman Suffrage Movement and Frederick Douglass (1908) |
|
In this speech given on the 60th Anniversary of the Seneca Falls Convention, Black women's rights advocate Mary Church Terrell reflects on the role of Frederick Douglass in the women's suffrage movement.
|
| Tydings–McDuffie Act (1934) |
|
This act established the process for the independence of the Philippine Islands, then a U.S. territory, after a ten-year transition period. The act reclassified Filipinos them from U.S. nationals to aliens and limited the number of immigrants from the Philippines to 50 per year.
|
| Undesirable Aliens Act (1929) |
|
This act made unlawfully entering the U.S. a crime for the first time. Immigrants who did not cross the border through an official point of entry, where they had to pay a fee and submit to tests, could be charged with a misdemeanor crime, facing fines and up to a year's imprisonment. Returning to the U.S. after deportation was made a felony, punishable by $1,000 in fines and up to two years imprisonment. This law applied to all immigrants entering the U.S., but was intended to restrict immigration from Mexico.
|
| United States v. Cartozian (1925) |
|
In this case, the District Court of Oregon debated whether an Armenian immigrant was white enough to be naturalized. Just two years after the Supreme Court ruled that Ozawa, a Japanese man, and Thind, a South Asian man, were not white enough for naturalization, the Oregon court ruled that people from Asia Minor were close enough to European descent to be naturalized.
|
| United States v. Kagama (1886) |
|
This Supreme Court case asserted the federal government's role in criminal jurisdiction on tribal lands. The Court ruled that the Indian Major Crimes act was constitutional, therefore federal courts had jurisdiction to indict Native defendants for murder.
|
| United States v. Sandoval (1913) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Pueblo people were Indians, repudiating the earlier United States v. Joseph decision which had held that they were not. The title to Pueblo lands was now seen as held by tribes instead of in fee simple, meaning that Congressional approval was needed in order to make land sales. This undermined the legitimacy of non-Indian land titles across New Mexico.
|
| United States v. Thind (1923) |
|
The Supreme Court found in U.S. v. Thind that Indian immigrants were not eligible for naturalization, based on a contested category of whiteness. Contradicting their 1922 ruling in Ozawa naming caucasian identity as a requirement for naturalization, as a South Asian immigrant, Thind was deemed ineligible for citizenship because, despite being racially caucasian, he did not appear white.
|