WI Earlier 14th Amendment Incorporation Doctrine

A discussion on the US Supreme Court; this is specifically what we're talking about.

An important point to remember: in OTL both the Slaughter-House Cases (1872-3) and United States v. Cruikshank (1875-6) were decided five to four. So supposing each were reversed? That is to say, the 1870's finds the Supreme Court:
  • finding that privileges and immunities of citizenship of both the whole United States and the states in particular were to be protected by the Fourteenth Amendment
  • incorporating the Fourteenth Amendment, so that the Bill of Rights might be (partially) applied to the state governments
How would subsequent US law and jurisprudence be affected? Or America as a whole for that matter? For example, with precedent like this, is it more plausible that the 1875 Civil Rights Act is upheld in whole or in part? More generally, could this lead to a more successful Reconstruction and stronger civil rights? Or what other effects could we have?
 
Last edited:
"In O’Neil v. Vermont,[202] the Supreme Court finally arrived at its most decisive nineteenth-century confrontation with the
issue of incorporation. The Eighth Amendment immunity from cruel and unusual punishments was the bone of contention on
this occasion.[203] Incorporation lost, five to three.[204]

"O’Neil was a crossroads in several ways. Bradley, the first Justice to unambiguously embrace total incorporation,[205] died
in office on January 22, 1892, just two days after the case was orally argued and less than three months before it was decided
on April 4, 1892.[206] The poignancy of that timing is somewhat diminished by the fact, as we have seen, that Bradley had
apparently already abandoned his support for incorporation. And even if he had not, his vote would not have made the
difference anyway.

"If, however, Justice Woods had also survived on the Court until O’Neil was decided, when he would have been only
sixty-seven[207]—and if he and Justice Bradley had both remained loyal to the incorporation theory they corresponded about
and championed in the early 1870s[208]—American constitutional history might have been very different. As discussed below,
Justice Field, in the evening of his career at age seventy-five,[209] finally resolved the mystery of his views by squarely
embracing incorporation. Agreeing with Field on that point were Justice Harlan and Field’s nephew, Justice David J. Brewer,
appointed two years earlier.[210] During the seventy-four years between Slaughter-House and Adamson, O’Neil thus represents
the high-water mark for the incorporation theory on the court..." https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/70421/OSLJ_V61N4_1457.pdf?sequence=1
 
Last edited:
Top