Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co.

{{Use American English|date=September 2025}} {{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}} {{Infobox SCOTUS case |Litigants=Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. |ArgueDateA=April 1 |ArgueDateB=2 |ArgueYear=1968 |DecideDate=June 17 |DecideYear=1968 |FullName=Joseph Lee Jones et ux. v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. et al. |ParallelCitations=88 S. Ct. 2186; 20 [[L. Ed. 2d]] 1189; 1968 [[U.S. LEXIS]] 2980; 1 Empl. Prac. Dec. ([[CCH (company)|CCH]]) ¶ 9832; 47 Ohio Op. 2d 43 |USVol=392 |USPage=409 |Prior=''[[Certiorari]]'' to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit |Subsequent= |Holding= The [[Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Thirteenth Amendment]] allows [[United States Congress|Congress]] to regulate the sale of private property to prevent racial discrimination, as such racial discrimination is a badge of slavery. |Majority=Stewart |JoinMajority=Warren, Black, Douglas, Brennan, Fortas, Marshall |Concurrence=Douglas |Dissent=Harlan |JoinDissent=White |LawsApplied={{UnitedStatesCode|42|1982}} |Overturned previous case= ''[[Hodges v. United States]]'', 203 U.S. 1 (1906),<ref name="Cornell20151022">{{cite web|title=Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. 392 U.S. 409 (1968)|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/392/409|publisher=Legal Information Institute at Cornell University Law School|access-date=22 October 2015|quote=Syllabus: "[T]he badges and incidents of slavery that the Thirteenth Amendment empowered Congress to eliminate included restraints upon those fundamental rights which are the essence of civil freedom, namely, the same right... to inherit, purchase, lease, sell and convey property, as is enjoyed by white citizens. ''[[Civil Rights Cases]]'', 09 U.S. 3, 22. Insofar as ''Hodges v. United States'', 203 U.S. 1, suggests a contrary holding, it is overruled." Footnote 78: "[W]e note that the entire Court [in the Civil Rights Cases; content added] agreed upon at least one proposition: the Thirteenth Amendment authorizes Congress not only to outlaw all forms of slavery and involuntary servitude, but also to eradicate the last vestiges and incidents of a society half slave and half free by securing to all citizens, of every race and color, the same right to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to inherit, purchase, lease, sell and convey property, as is enjoyed by white citizens.... The conclusion of the majority in ''Hodges'' rested upon a concept of congressional power under the Thirteenth Amendment irreconcilable with the position taken by every member of this Court in the Civil Rights Cases and incompatible with the history and purpose of the Amendment itself. Insofar as Hodges is inconsistent with our holding today, it is hereby overruled."}}</ref> & ''[[Civil Rights Cases]]'', 109 U.S. 3 (1883) (in part) }} {{wikisource|Jones v. Mayer|''Jones v. Mayer''}} '''''Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co.''''', 392 U.S. 409 (1968), is a [[List of landmark court decisions in the United States|landmark]] case in which the [[United States Supreme Court]] held that [[United States Congress|Congress]] could regulate the sale of private property to prevent racial discrimination: "<nowiki>[</nowiki>{{UnitedStatesCode|42|1982}}<nowiki>]</nowiki> bars all racial discrimination, private as well as public, in the sale or rental of property, and that the statute, thus construed, is a valid exercise of the power of Congress to enforce the [[Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Thirteenth Amendment]]."{{ref|citation}}

The [[Civil Rights Act of 1866]] (passed by Congress over the veto of [[Andrew Johnson]]) provided the basis for this decision as embodied by {{UnitedStatesCode|42|1982}}.

Reversing many precedents, the Supreme Court held that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 prohibited both private and state-backed discrimination and that the 13th Amendment authorized Congress to prohibit private acts of discrimination as among "the [[badges and incidents of slavery]]." Congress possessed the power to "determine what are the badges and incidents of slavery, and the authority to translate that determination into effective legislation."

==See also== *[[List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 392]] *''[[Shelley v. Kraemer]]'' (1948), private landowners racial discrimination case

==References== {{Reflist}}

== Further reading == * {{cite journal | last = Greene | first = Jamal | title = Thirteenth Amendment optimism | journal = [[Columbia Law Review]] | volume = 112 | issue = 7 | pages = 1733–1768 | publisher = [[Columbia Law School]] | jstor = 41708163 | date = November 2012 | url = http://columbialawreview.org/thirteenth-amendment-optimism/ | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150107063310/http://columbialawreview.org/thirteenth-amendment-optimism/ | archive-date = 2015-01-07 }} [https://web.archive.org/web/20151117023919/http://columbialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/1733-1768.pdf Pdf.]

==External links== *{{note|citation}} {{caselaw source |case=''Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co.'', {{Ussc|392|409|1968|el=no}} |cornell=https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/392/409 |courtlistener=https://www.courtlistener.com/scotus/y2J/jones-v-alfred-h-mayer-co/ |findlaw=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=392&page=409 |internetarchive={{IA SCOTUS URL |id=micro_IA40386413_0028}} |justia=http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/409/ |loc =http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep392/usrep392409/usrep392409.pdf |oyez=https://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_645 |vlex=http://supreme.vlex.com/vid/jones-v-alfred-mayer-19991285 }}

[[Category:United States Supreme Court cases]] [[Category:United States Supreme Court cases of the Warren Court]] [[Category:United States Thirteenth Amendment case law]] [[Category:United States Supreme Court cases in 1968]] [[Category:American Civil Liberties Union litigation]] [[Category:Implied statutory cause of action case law]] [[Category:Civil rights movement case law]] [[Category:African-American history of Missouri]] [[Category:United States racial discrimination case law]]