Civil Rights Act of 1968: Martin Luther King, Jr., a civil rights leader and activist, was slain in Memphis, Tennessee on April 4, 1968.
Following his killing, President Lyndon B. Johnson placed pressure on Congress to adopt new civil rights legislation, which sparked rioting in over 100 places across the United States. LBJ claimed that passing the Civil Rights Act of 1968 before King’s funeral on April 9 would be a suitable tribute to King and his legacy.
During the King assassination riots, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Pub.L. 90–284, 82 Stat. 73, enacted April 11, 1968).
The Indian Civil Rights Act, which covers Titles II through VII, pertains to Native American tribes in the United States and makes many, but not all, of the Bill of Rights provisions applicable within the tribes.
1st (that Act appears today in Title 25, sections 1301 to 1303 of the United States Code).
The Fair Housing Act, which was enacted as a follow-up to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, is often known as Titles VIII and IX (this is different legislation than the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, which expanded housing funding programs).
There were no federal enforcement measures in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which banned discrimination in housing. The 1968 statute built on prior legislation by prohibiting discrimination in housing sales, rentals, and financing based on race, religion, national origin, and, since 1974, sex.
The act has protected people with disabilities and families with children since 1988. Pregnant women are additionally protected from discrimination because they have been granted family status, with their unborn child as the other family member.
Discrimination victims may seek redress under both the 1968 legislation and section 1983 of the 1866 statute. Federal solutions are provided by the 1968 act, while private solutions are provided by the 1866 statute (i.e., civil suits).
The act also made it illegal to “injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone… by force or threat of force… because of their race, color, religion, or national origin, handicap, or familial position.”
The Anti-Riot Act, often known as Title X, makes it illegal to “travel in interstate commerce…with the aim to incite, advocate, encourage, engage in, or carry on a riot.” It has been argued that this law “equates organized political protest with organized violence.”
Civil Rights Movement
Despite significant progress made during the civil rights movement, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, race-based housing patterns remained a barrier in the late 1960s.
While African American and Mexican American military personnel fought and died for their country in Vietnam, many families struggled to rent or buy properties in residential areas due to their race or national origin.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the G.I. Forum lobbied for the passage of new fair housing legislation. Clarence Mitchell, Jr., the Washington Director of the NAACP, was so successful in getting civil rights legislation passed that he was dubbed the “101st senator.”
On April 10, 1968, the United States Congress approved the Civil Rights Act of 1968, just one day after LBJ’s targeted deadline for King’s funeral. It was the final, big legislative triumph of the civil rights period.
The Civil Rights Act of 1968, often known as the Fair Housing Act, is an expansion of the groundbreaking Civil Rights Act of 1964 that forbids discrimination in the sale, rental, or financing of housing based on race, religion, national origin, or sex.
States in the United States
In order to avoid non-racial discrimination, the New York State Human Rights Law extends protection to marital status and age.
New York State Property Law Sections 236 and 237 expand the protection to encompass houses with children and mobile home parks. This is to prevent landlords and dealers from discriminating against families with several children.
The Fair Housing Act currently protects people from discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability.
The law covers all forms of housing, including rental dwellings, apartments, condos, and single-family homes. The act is only exempt if the owner of a modest rental building resides in the same building that he rents out. He may choose who lives in the building because he owns it and lives there himself.
Infringements on the Fair Housing Act
According to HUD, there are an estimated 2 million occurrences of housing discrimination each year.
The National Fair Housing Alliance, the country’s largest non-profit dedicated to fair housing, says that the number is closer to 4 million every year, eliminating cases of discrimination based on handicap or family status.
Housing projects have also been criticized by academics and non-governmental organizations.
Elizabeth Julian and Michael Daniel, housing advocates, state:
Aside from the disparities in housing provided to low-income African-American families under federal programs, the neighborhoods in which they receive assistance are frequently subject to a variety of adverse conditions not found in the neighborhoods surrounding housing units in which whites receive the same assistance.
Poor city-provided facilities and services, little or no new or newer residential housing, large numbers of seriously substandard structures, noxious environmental conditions, substandard or completely absent neighborhood service facilities, high crime rates, insufficient access to job centers, and little or no new capital investment in the area by public and private entities are among the conditions.
The Emancipation Proclamation, signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863, declared that “all individuals held as slaves… should be then, thenceforward, and forever free…”
All people born in the United States are legally citizens, according to the Civil Rights Act of 1866. They may rent, hold, sell, and acquire property as a result of this.
It was intended to aid former slaves, and those who refused to offer ex-slaves new rights were found guilty and punished by the law.
A fine of $1,000 was imposed, with a potential sentence of one year in prison. The 1866 statute did not include any mechanisms for enforcing the requirements.