Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 April 2024
Constitutional scholars have conceptualized Reconstruction debate mainly as a debate over the meaning of the original Constitution. However, Civil War narratives that identified “the problems” with slavery and emplotted the events of slavery politics were a major vehicle by which the Fourteenth Amendment was debated. Dispute over a text (the original Constitution) and dispute over the description of events intertwined. This article elucidates the content of slavery/war narratives and applies them to the domain of constitutional law. Crucial elements of the Northern Democratic war narrative were endorsed by the Supreme Court in the Slaughter-House Cases (1873), even though the Democrats were the legislative losers. Democratic history, grounded on a strong strain of white supremacy extending back to Stephen Douglas, played a crucial role in legitimating the Court's narrow doctrinal interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Special thanks to Arthur Stinchcombe, who many years ago expressed very kind words for an earlier version of this material, and Ronald Kahn, who more recently offered great enthusiasm and terrific reading suggestions. I would also like to thank Sanford Levinson, who for the second time has made an LSR article for me better than it would have been otherwise. Though they probably do not remember it, Michael Grossberg and Christopher Tomlins offered support as well. Finally, I am in the debt of Susan Silbey and the anonymous referees at LSR. I feel extremely fortunate to have received their comments and advice.