Heart Of Atlanta Vs America Case Study

Cassy M. Heffentrager
Dr. Harding
Government Pd. 1
22 November, 2016
Even though the Civil Rights Act was passed, did business owners still have the right to serve whomever they chose? Was Moreton Rolleston Jr.’s rights taken away? In order to understand Heart of Atlanta v. United States, it is important to know why the case arrived at the U.S Supreme Court, how the case was decided, and what its impact was on the United States.
According to “Heart of Atlanta Motel” The Heart of Atlanta motel located in Atlanta, Georgia was a very popular hotel during 1956 and years after. It was a well-known across the country from New York to Miami. Hotel owner Moreton Rolleston Jr. was a strong believer that he had the right to say who could stay in his
hotel (Brannen 674). Although the government had passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 some people in the South still discriminated against blacks (Brannen 673). Moreton Rolleston Jr. was planning on still allowing whomever he chose to stay at his hotel and decided to file a lawsuit. He believed that the government had violated the Fifth Amendment. “The Fifth Amendment says that no person shall be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” (Brannen 675). This case started to be argued on October 5, 1964 (Hall 369). The Thirteen Amendment stated that you cannot discriminate or have slavery was one reason they believed that Moreton Rolleston Jr. was in the wrong. Also The Commerce Clause Article 1 Section 8, “Grants Congress the power to regulate all interstate commerce” (Brannen 673). This was the first major test for the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The court decided 9 to 0(unanimous) that the owner of the Heart of Atlanta Motel, Moreton Rolleston Jr.
was breaking the law (United States). The judges involved in this cause were as followed Hugo L. Black, William J. Brennan Jr., Tom C. Clark, William O. Douglas, Arthur Goldberg, John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Steward, Earl Warren, Byron R. White (Brannen 672). There was no concurring opinion found. Moreton Rolleston Jr. claimed his rights were taken. He said that the Supreme Court had over stepped their right and had taken away his Fifth Amendment (Brannen 675). This was the first test of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Brannen 672). Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause allowed them to regulate all the interstate commerce (Brannen 673). The Commerce Clause gave the United States the right to regulate who could stay at the hotel (Hall 369). The Court ruled that under the Commerce Clause and Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Moreton Rolleston Jr. was found guilty (Brannen 672). The Court demanded that Rolleston Jr. stop refusing Blacks as guests and allow them to stay in the hotel (Brannen 676). In short, Moreton Rolleston Jr. was no longer allowed to discriminate against anyone who wanted to stay at his hotel (United States JUSTIA
379).
Now that the Heart of Atlanta was open to all races hotel owners across the state would have decided if they were going to follow the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Brannen 676).
Moreton Rolleston Jr. had to open his hotel up he could no longer discriminate (Brannen 676). They people who would lodge there had to deal with the new rule of not discriminating. Blacks now had the right to more places to stay while traveling something they did not have much of at the time. They no longer had to stay in houses with rented out rooms (Brannen 673). This was not only the first major test of Civil Rights Act of 1964 but it also opened new doors for Blacks (Brannen 672). Even though discrimination was still happening their rights were growing every day.
Moreton Rolleston Jr. was no longer allowed to discriminate against the guest who stayed in his hotel. The case Heart of Atlanta v. United States determined that Rolleston Jr’s rights where not taken away. I believe no one should be discriminated against no matter their skin color or religion. Moreton Rolleston Jr. living in the South was doing what he believed was right but that does not always make it right. Though some people in the United States still had a lot of discrimination against blacks it was good to know that the government was taking a stand against
it.