Legal Environmental of Business

Chapter 5: Discrimination (Eyes on the Prize)

1) During the beginning of the Civil Rights movement with Tennessee known as the Athens of the South,
public areas were segregated so blacks demanded equal rights. Nashville contained 4 black colleges such as
Fisk drawn from Jim Lawson preaching Civil Rights Action which inspired 3 students leading Nashvilles
first sit in a public restaurant. In the 1
st
day, no violence was taken by the African American college
students (they werent taken seriously because of the Caucasians in the area saw them as agitators from a
different area). 2 weeks later a gang came into the restaurant and started harassing the students but the
students were nonviolent. The police soon intervened arrested the African Americans. The city soon faced
with whether segregation was ethical but the students were found guilty of disorderly conduct and
sentenced to jail and community service. With the sit-in movement the national attention of the issues were
heard and 80000 were arrested. Meanwhile at Tennessee, African Americans feared to be in public places
because of being attacked not only the students but also the locals. Later in April 19
th,
Loobys home was
attacked with explosives, and the enraged students started a movement and marched down Jefferson Ave to
start their protest to city hall to protest Ben West. After some negotiations between the leaders and the
owners, an agreement was made and some stores started desegregation. After this initial movement, the
leaders of this sit-in became some of the key leaders in the Civil Rights movement.

2) Social factors that caused by the discrimination were cause by the majority of the population who were
made of Caucasians, the African American population, and by the government. Most of the Caucasians of
America viewed themselves as the superior race therefore viewed themselves to be the dominating race of
the population ever since they were born. The average African American viewed that discrimination is part
of their society. Even if some of them disagreed with these ideas, the majority feared to create a movement
of change because the government and the majority of the people in the United States were not on their
side, and laws made in the past said all people were separate but equal. Caucasians treated the African
Americans equally but still separated them causing the discrimination.

3) Because the African Americans were from a different state, the Heart of Atlanta Hotel conducted interstate
commerce. Through the Commerce Clause, Congress can regulate any form of interstate commerce so
federal law applies to them. Through the Civil Rights Act, no person or group of people shall be segregated
in areas of public places. Section 201 (c) defined areas of public places which included hotels therefore the
hotel is classified as a public place. The federal law known as the Civil Rights Act applies to the public
areas including the Heart of Atlanta Hotel. Congress can regulate the Heart of Atlanta Hotel through the
Commerce Clause and apply the Civil Rights Act and to any other public places. Also, they have the power
to promote interstate commerce as well as regulate local incidents including local activates which may be
considered harmful to towards commerce. The courts ruled that Congress could have done other methods to
eliminate obstructions caused by the racial discrimination but do not have a responsibility on this type of
argument. The responsibilities of these obstructions lie within the discretion of Congress under the
Constitution. Under Morgan v. Virginia, transportation in interstate commerce affects the decisions are
under the responsibilities of Congress including keeping interstate commerce free from immoral and
injurious uses.
Under the Civil Rights Act, Title Section 201, nobody should be discriminated or segregated in
terms of different ground of race, color, religion or national origin in any public places including
restaurants. This federal law applies to all jurisdictions ruled by Congress. Under Morgan v. Virginia,
segregation between people of different races in interstate travel is unconstitutional. Because of the
Commerce Clause, Congress can regulate interstate commerce and is not limited to intrastate commerce.
Congress can regulate Ollies, therefore all federal laws and regulations made by congress affect the
restaurant in terms of interstate commerce.
Though the farmer was not actively transacting through interstate commerce he was still affecting
the economy in Wickard v. Filburn. By affecting the economy of the country, he was transacting through
interstate commerce. Through the commercial clause, Congress can regulate interstate commerce. The
federal laws can affect the farmer through interstate commerce including the Agricultural Adjustment Act.
The bridge between interstate commerce is under the commercial clause of the constitution. The farmer
was in violation of the Agricultural Adjustment Act so had to pay a penalty because he was engaged in
interstate commerce. Any form of intrastate commerce is considered interstate commerce so all federal
laws apply including the Civil Rights Act.

4) In the Heart of Atlanta Hotel, The people voted for congress so it is their power to regulate the rule in
which how commerce is going to be orchestrated between more than one states. Under Morgan v. Virginia,
segregation in interstate travel is interstate commerce in a public place so it is under federal jurisdiction in
that case. Congress therefore not only is limited to regulating interstate commerce but it extends to
intrastate commerce as long as it is appropriate and has a legitimate result. Congress has the power to
promote interstate commerce including regulating local activities including that of the state including the
Civil Rights Act. Under the Constitution, it is not the job of the courts to regulate interstate commerce but
the job of Congress.
In Wickard v. Filburn, the courts concluded that though his transactions are part of intrastate
commerce, and exchanges locally, he still is a part of interstate commerce. Therefore, federal laws
including the Agriculture Adjustment Act apply to the farmer. The farmer still plays a role in interstate
commerce even if it is small and considered trivial. Through the Commerce Clause, Congress still has
jurisdiction on the farmer and the Agricultural Adjustment Act applies to him. By not engaging in interstate
commerce or even in a trivial amount, one still affects the economy and thus is engaging in interstate
commerce.
In Katzenbach v. McClung, the courts concluded that business transactions were being impeded
because small businesses were not able to be opened because of Title II. However, the court concluded that
discrimination and the movement of interstate commerce had no connection between one another. Congress
can regulate this Act upon businesses and is not abusing their power and is considered a valid exercise.
Congress is keeping the channels of interstate commerce free from immoral and injurious uses.