Civil and Human Rights

OP-ED: Celebrate the whole Constitution

Re: “The three-fifth clause an imperfect compromise,” Another View by Steven Philbrick, Monday:

Constitution Day, which was Monday, was a time to reflect on our nation’s charter and how Americans over the course of more than two centuries have struggled to create a more perfect union true to our core constitutional values. To that end, professor Steven Philbrick sets out to understand the three-fifths compromise. But he turns a blind eye to one of our Constitution’s deepest injustices, accusing myself and others of “foment(ing) disrespect of the Constitution and contempt for the founders who authored it.”

Try as he might, Philbrick cannot erase the framers’ decision to count enslaved persons as three-fifths of a person for purposes of determining representation in Congress.

It is a tragic fact that some of the Constitution’s most celebrated authors held slaves and wrote critical protections of slavery into a document that sought to “secure the blessings of liberty.” In the three-fifths clause, the framers gave slaveholding states additional representation in Congress and additional votes in the Electoral College based on the number of slaves held in bondage.

This was justified on the view that slaves were too degraded to be treated as fully human. For example, in the Federalist Papers, James Madison defended the three-fifths clause, claiming that slaves had been “debased by servitude below the equal level of free inhabitants.” We should not pretend this history doesn’t exist.

At the Constitutional Convention, a number of delegates saw this horrendous injustice for what it was. For example, Gouverneur Morris, one of the Founding Fathers, denounced the additional representation the clause provided to slaveholders. “The inhabitant of Georgia and S.C. who goes to the coast of Africa” and “tears away his fellow creatures from their dearest connections & dam(n)s them to the most cruel bondages, shall have more votes in a Govt. instituted for the protection of mankind.” As Morris powerfully argued, the three-fifths clause was fatally inconsistent with the Constitution’s protection of basic human rights.

Because of its pro-slavery features, critics of slavery called the original Constitution a “covenant with death” and an “agreement with Hell.” But in the wake of the Civil War, the American people rid the Constitution of the stain of chattel slavery, adopting three transformative amendments that, together, constitute a “Second Founding.” The 13th, 14th and 15th amendments abolished chattel slavery, made equal protection an explicit constitutional mandate, and guaranteed the right to vote free from racial discrimination. These amendments relegated the three-fifths clause to the dustbin and helped to transform our Constitution from an aggressively pro-slavery document to one that actually promised equal citizenship to all.

Understanding this story does not “foment” disrespect for the Constitution. It is essential to understand our Constitution’s true story. Erasing the past won’t change it.

More from Civil and Human Rights

Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Payan v. Los Angeles Community College District

In Payan v. Los Angeles Community College District, the Ninth Circuit is considering whether lost educational opportunities are compensable under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

Stanley v. City of Sanford

In Stanley v. City of Sanford, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Americans with Disabilities Act protects against disability discrimination with respect to retirement benefits distributed after employment. 
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Skrmetti

In United States v. Skrmetti, the Supreme Court is considering whether Tennessee’s ban on providing gender-affirming medical care to transgender adolescents violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Civil and Human Rights
July 31, 2024

Supreme Court Allows Cities to Punish Homelessness

The Regulatory Review
At the end of its 2023-24 term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued several divided decisions...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Civil and Human Rights
June 28, 2024

RELEASE: Ignoring constitutional history and original meaning, conservative majority allows city governments to punish people for sleeping in public even if they have nowhere else to go

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in City of Grants Pass...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Civil and Human Rights
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court decision keeps the door open to accountability for police officers who make false charges

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Chiaverini v. City...
By: Brian R. Frazelle