Changes

==Senate opponents block the Act==

==Senate opponents block the Act==

[[File:Joseph T. Robinson of AR.jpg|thumb|right|230px|Prominent progressive leader [[Joe T. Robinson]] attempted to defeat the Act using a motion to adjourn the Senate.]]

[[File:Joseph T. Robinson of AR.jpg|thumb|right|230px|Prominent progressive leader [[Joe T. Robinson]] attempted to defeat the Act using a motion to adjourn the Senate.]]

Due to the Senate under the control of Democrats, who swept elections nationwide in the wake of the [[Great Depression]] amid backlash against Republican policies, the battle for the bill's passage was uphill from the start. The legislation was blocked by Southern Democrats in what ''[[The New York Times]]'' designated "one of the most determined filibusters of recent years."<ref name=vassar/> Mississippi senator Pat Harrison, who previously led the white supremacist congressional circle defeating the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill of 1922, proposed allowing the bill to be taken up, whereupon he would immediately introduce a motion to lay it aside. The more radical Southern Democratic proposal, consistent with their parliamentary orthodoxy, was to directly filibuster it to death.<ref name=vassar/>

Due to the Senate under the control of Democrats, who swept elections nationwide in the wake of the [[Great Depression]] amid backlash against Republican policies, the battle for the bill's passage was uphill from the start. The fact that the [[Senate Majority Leader]] was [[Joseph T. Robinson]] of [[Arkansas]] only ensured the bill's defeat. Although mainstream sources mostly ignore his anti–civil rights role,<ref group=note>This is likely due to Robinson's indisputable reputation as a hardline progressive leftist among the Southern bloc; due to contemporary left-wing academics defining civil rights as a "left-wing" position and white supremacy as "right-wing," pointing out Robinson's role as an obstructor of civil rights legislation would destroy their own narratives.</ref> When Costigan asked Robinson to help pass the Act on the grounds that FDR voiced a limited level of support (Roosevelt issued a reply at a presidential news conference, the day after meeting with White, where he expressed lukewarm backing for a Senate vote), no reply was returned by the Arkansas Democratic leader.<ref>"The Anti-Lynching Bill of 1935," pp. 76–77.</ref>

The fact that the [[Senate Majority Leader]] was [[Joseph T. Robinson]] of [[Arkansas]] only ensured the bill's defeat. Although mainstream sources mostly ignore his anti–civil rights role,<ref group=note>This is likely due to Robinson's indisputable reputation as a hardline progressive leftist among the Southern bloc; due to contemporary left-wing academics defining civil rights as a "left-wing" position and white supremacy as "right-wing," pointing out Robinson's role as an obstructor of civil rights legislation would destroy their own narratives.</ref> Robinson played a crucial part in killing the Costigan–Wagner Act. He introduced a motion to adjourn the Senate until the chamber would hold a debate over a separate piece of legislation, thus indefinitely stalling off passage of the Act.<ref name=vassar/> This stood in contrast to the two other proposals by anti–civil rights forces which suggested either laying it aside or directly filibustering it to death.

In 1935, the Costigan–Wagner Act was reintroduced. The legislation was blocked by Southern Democrats in what ''[[The New York Times]]'' designated "one of the most determined filibusters of recent years."<ref name=vassar/> Mississippi senator Pat Harrison, who previously led the white supremacist congressional circle defeating the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill of 1922, proposed allowing the bill to be taken up, whereupon he would immediately introduce a motion to lay it aside. The more radical Southern Democratic proposal, consistent with their parliamentary orthodoxy, was to directly filibuster it to death.<ref name=vassar/>

 

Robinson played a crucial part in killing the Costigan–Wagner Act. He introduced a motion to adjourn the Senate until the chamber would hold a debate over a separate piece of legislation, thus indefinitely stalling off passage of the Act.<ref name=vassar/> This stood in contrast to the two other proposals by anti–civil rights forces which suggested either laying it aside or directly filibustering it to death.

On April 26, 1935, the adjourn motion was narrowly defeated by a 33–34 vote, with most Republicans voting against it while only a third of Democrats opposed it.<ref name=govtrack>[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/74-1/s53 TO ADJOURN. THE PENDING BUSINESS IS S. 24, A BILL TO PREVENT LYNCHING, ON WHICH THE SENATE WAS DEADLOCKED.] ''GovTrack.us''. Retrieved December 1, 2022.</ref> However, as reported by ''The New York Times'' two days later, the anti–civil rights forces were prepared to use "extended oratory" and "other parliamentary devices" against the Act.<ref>Catledge, Turner (April 28, 1935). [https://www.nytimes.com/1935/04/28/archives/antilynching-measure-meets-dogged-hostility-opponents-of.html ANTI-LYNCHING MEASURE MEETS DOGGED HOSTILITY; Opponents of Costigan-Wagner Bill Ready to Fight It With Extended Oratory and Other Parliamentary Devices]. ''The New York Times''. Retrieved December 1, 2022.</ref> Although the initial adjourning attempts fell short, backdoor maneuvering and political trading ultimately resulted in a motion passing on May 1.<ref name=brown>Brown, Mary Jane (2017). [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Eradicating_this_Evil/2kQ3DwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=costigan-wagner+act+joseph+t.+robinson&pg=PT253&printsec=frontcover ''Eradicating this Evil: Women in the American Anti-Lynching Movement, 1892-1940'']. ''Google Books''. Retrieved December 2, 2022.</ref><ref>[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/74-1/s57 TO ADJOURN UNTIL 3:30 THE SAME DAY.] ''GovTrack.us''. Retrieved December 2, 2022.</ref> Subsequently, former Republican congressman Leonidas C. Dyer, the author of the 1922 anti-lynching bill, stated that practical efforts to pass federal anti-lynching legislation would prove futile when Congress is controlled by the Democratic Party. Dyer believed that petition efforts by White and other prominent black leaders, which urged legislative action, faced a bleak outlook.<ref name=brown/>

On April 26, 1935, the adjourn motion was narrowly defeated by a 33–34 vote, with most Republicans voting against it while only a third of Democrats opposed it.<ref name=govtrack>[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/74-1/s53 TO ADJOURN. THE PENDING BUSINESS IS S. 24, A BILL TO PREVENT LYNCHING, ON WHICH THE SENATE WAS DEADLOCKED.] ''GovTrack.us''. Retrieved December 1, 2022.</ref> However, as reported by ''The New York Times'' two days later, the anti–civil rights forces were prepared to use "extended oratory" and "other parliamentary devices" against the Act.<ref>Catledge, Turner (April 28, 1935). [https://www.nytimes.com/1935/04/28/archives/antilynching-measure-meets-dogged-hostility-opponents-of.html ANTI-LYNCHING MEASURE MEETS DOGGED HOSTILITY; Opponents of Costigan-Wagner Bill Ready to Fight It With Extended Oratory and Other Parliamentary Devices]. ''The New York Times''. Retrieved December 1, 2022.</ref> Although the initial adjourning attempts fell short, backdoor maneuvering and political trading ultimately resulted in a motion passing on May 1.<ref name=brown>Brown, Mary Jane (2017). [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Eradicating_this_Evil/2kQ3DwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=costigan-wagner+act+joseph+t.+robinson&pg=PT253&printsec=frontcover ''Eradicating this Evil: Women in the American Anti-Lynching Movement, 1892-1940'']. ''Google Books''. Retrieved December 2, 2022.</ref><ref>[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/74-1/s57 TO ADJOURN UNTIL 3:30 THE SAME DAY.] ''GovTrack.us''. Retrieved December 2, 2022.</ref> Subsequently, former Republican congressman Leonidas C. Dyer, the author of the 1922 anti-lynching bill, stated that practical efforts to pass federal anti-lynching legislation would prove futile when Congress is controlled by the Democratic Party. Dyer believed that petition efforts by White and other prominent black leaders, which urged legislative action, faced a bleak outlook.<ref name=brown/>