 From Back Alley to the Border: Criminal Abortion in the 20th Century U.S. |
|
This teaching module looks at the history of criminal abortion in the 20th century, featuring a webinar with Alicia Gutierrez-Romine, author of the 2020 book, From Back Alley to the Border: Criminal Abortion in California, 1920-1969.
|
| George Quander versus the Law (1897-1908) |
|
George Quander was the nephew of Felix Quander. Like his uncle, George had run-ins with Fairfax County officials, culminating in 1908, when he was shot and killed by a deputy sheriff serving a warrant. The Alexandria Gazette is unsympathetic in its coverage of George Quander's encounters with the court, its officers, and the racist white citizens of Fairfax County.
|
| Gonzales v. Williams (1903) |
|
Gonzales v. Williams is one of a series of cases decided by the Supreme Court addressing the status of U.S. territories known as the Insular Cases. This case determined that while people from Puerto Rico were not citizens of the United States, they were also not "aliens." This case labelled those in unincorporated territories as U.S, nationals instead of citizens.
|
| Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) |
|
In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court found that medical privacy was constitutionally protected regarding reproductive decisions. The Griswold decision helped set precedent for the decision in Roe v. Wade.
|
| Hawaii v. Mankichi (1903) |
|
Hawaii v. Mankichi is one of a series of cases decided by the Supreme Court addressing the status of U.S. territories known as the Insular Cases. This case considered the extent to which the Constitution should apply to Hawaii and how the new territory's previous legal codes could be folded into the laws of the Territory of Hawaii.
|
| Hernandez v. Texas (1954) |
|
Hernandez v. Texas showed racial discrimination in all-white juries, reflected in Juan Crow segragation.
|
| Hirabayashi v. United States (1943) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court held that curfews against minority groups were constitutional at a time of war against the country that group's ancestors originated from. After the Executive Order 9066 was issued in the wake of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Americans were subject to curfews and other restrictions in addition to being removed to internment camps. Gordon Hirabayashi was convicted of violating the curfew. This was a companion case to Yasui v. United States, decided on the same day.
|
| Hoyt v. Florida (1961) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether laws like that of Florida, which allowed women to be exempt from serving on juries unless they specifically registered to do so, were constitutional. Gwendolyn Hoyt alleged that because there were no women on her jury, she was not given a fair trial. The Court decided that because women were given an opportunity to register to be considered for jury duty, the law was constitutional.
|
| Hundley v. Gorewitz (1942) |
|
In this case, a federal court struck down a restrictive covenant in Washington, D.C., under the "change of neighborhood" doctrine which allowed a court to declare a restrictive covenant unenforceable if the neighborhood had changed to the point that the original purpose of the covenant had been defeated. In the Hundleys' case, NAACP lawyer Charles Hamilton Houston persuaded the court that the neighborhood was already becoming predominantly Black. These private agreements that prohibited the sale or rental of land to non-white individuals were intended to maintain residential segregation. Restrictive covenants were eventually struck down by the Supreme Court in Shelley v. Kraemer (1948).
|
| Hurd v. Hodge (1948) |
|
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that judicial enforcement of restrictive covenants banning the purchase or occupation of property based on race by D.C. courts is prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1866. Hurd v. Hodge was decided alongside Shelley v. Kraemer, which held that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits such restrictive covenants.
|
| Immigration Act of 1891 |
|
The Immigration Act of 1891 gave the Federal Government direct control over assessing and processing immigrants into the United States. It prohibited polygamists, people convicted of "crimes of moral turpitude," and people with certain diseases from entering the U.S. The act also created the Office of the Superintendent of Immigration within the Treasury Department to regulate immigration.
|
| Immigration Act of 1917 |
|
The 1917 Immigration Act was a federal law that created the Asiatic barred zone, prohibiting immigration from Asian nations.
|
| Immigration Act of 1924 |
|
Also known as the Johnson–Reed Act, this federal law set quotas on the number of immigrants from every country outside Latin America and barred immigration from Asia entirely.
|
| Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 |
|
Also known as the McCarran–Walter Act, this act of Congress retained the national origins quotas for controlling immigration, but granted immigration quotas to all countries and removed racial restrictions for naturalization.
|
| Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 |
|
The Immigration and Nationality Act amended the 1924 Immigration Act, functionally repealing the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. This act started the categorization of refugees, but continued the U.S. pattern of defining refugees by geography or politics, and not adopting United Nations terminology.
|
| In re Halladjian et al. (1909) |
|
In this case, a Massachusetts circuit court ruled that people from West Asia were so intermixed with Europeans that the Armenian plaintiffs should be considered white and admitted to U.S. citizenship.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Agnes Smith for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1921) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Agnes Smith shows legal challenges on the part of women in the early twentieth century from carceral confinement. After she was committed to an institute for "feeble-minded youth," Agnes' parents attempted to regain custody of her. The court denied the writ, claiming that Agnes was a "fit and proper subject" for the institution.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Andrew J. Sawyer for Writ of Habeas Corpus for Chin Tu Ling, Lee Shun, and Look Fung (1898) |
|
In this case, three Chinese girls between the ages of 15 and 18 used habeas corpus to free themselves from the custody of the Mee Lee Wah Village Company responsible for developing the Chinese Village for the Trans-Mississippi and International Exposition in Omaha. The judge found that the girls were being kept for "immoral purposes" and were remanded to the custody of a missionary doctor who would make arrangements for their return to China. After this judgment, the company filed their own petition for a writ of habeas corpus in an attempt to re-establish custody of the girls, who, they argued, owed a contractual obligation to the corporation until the close of the exposition. In this second case, the judge released the girls into the custody of the Mee Lee Wah Village Company so that they could fulfill their contracts.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Claus Hubbard for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1898) |
|
In this case, a prominent member of Omaha's 3rd Ward was arrested for vagrancy. To challenge his wrongful arrest, Claus Hubbard petitioned for habeas corpus, arguing that he was targeted by police because of his activism in the community. Hubbard frequently provided legal advisement and bail to African Americans facing indiscriminate arrests. The court agreed, ordering his release and also admonishing the police for violating the constitutional liberties of citizens.
|
| In the Matter of the Application of Gussie Burns for Writ of Habeas Corpus (1920) |
|
In this case, Gussie Burns was arrested for vagrancy, found guilty, and sentenced to 30 days in the county jail. After her sentencing, she was subjected to a physical examination and reportedly found to have venereal disease. As a result, she was sent to the Omaha Women's Detention Home for treatment. After being confined to the home for four months, Gussie petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that her 30 day sentence had long since passed, the disease she was alleged to have did not exist, and that officials would not release her until she consented to "an operation for the removal of certain tubes." A writ was granted, though the outcome of her case is unknown. Cases like Gussie's illustrate the legal sophistication of women in the face of attempts to subordinate them during the Progressive Era.
|
| In the Matter of the Petition of Ham Hung Wah by Tom Sing for Writ of Habeas Corpus (1911) |
|
The habeas corpus petition of Ham Hung Wah shows legal challenges related to immigration in the early twentieth century. In this case, the twelve-year-old native-born son of Chinese immigrant parents was arrested and detained as "an alien Chinese person seeking unlawfully to land in the United States" after returning to America from China where he had been visiting his grandparents. To support his son's petition, Ham Hung Wah's father also submitted an affidavit from prominent white members of society testifying to the family's trustworthiness, membership in the Presbyterian Church, and adoption of the "habits of western civilization." The petition was eventually dismissed at the request of Wah's attorney. His fate is unknown.
|
| In the Matter of the Petition of Kichitaro Kubota and Ise Kubota for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (1920) |
|
In this habeas case, a Japanese immigrant and his new wife were denied entry to the United States after visiting Japan. Kichitaro Kubota presented evidence of his employment and property-ownership to the court and condemned the prejudice that led to their exclusion. The judge found that Kubota and his wife were entitled to be admitted into the U.S. and ordered them released from detention.
|
| Indian Appropriation Bill (1902) |
|
This senate appropriation bill outlined amended laws related to the Dawes Commission and the Five Tribes, which set timelines for critical tribal citizenship processes.
|
| Indian Appropriations Act of 1893 |
|
This appropriations act shows funding for a range of federal projects on tribal lands in the late nineteenth century. Monies were allocated toward payroll for agents, interpreters, surveyors, and boarding school superintendents, as well as traveling and various expenses for same; treaty stipulations and material support on reservations and treaty lands; boarding schools; and distribution on interest of trust fund stocks. The act shows key federal interventions in the establishment of institutions, as well as the commission later entitled the Dawes Commission.
|
| Indian Appropriations Act of 1902 |
|
Referred to as the "Dead Indian Act," this congressional act shows how privilege was given to guardians with the power to sell allotted land of minor heirs of deceased tribal citizens. The act also established a new federal judicial district in Indian Territory.
|