Bond on Capias from United States v. Murray Stanley
6/7/1876
Add to Favorites:
Add all page(s) of this document to activity:
Add only page 1 to activity:
Add only page 2 to activity:
In United States v. Stanley, Murray Stanley refused dining services at his inn to Bird Gee, a black man, on October 10, 1875. Attorney George R. Peck filed suit in the District Court for the District of Kansas. Unable to reach a decision, the court filed a certificate of division with the United States Supreme Court.
Five cases (Stanley, Ryan, Nichols, Robinson, and Singleton) were eventually consolidated into the Civil Rights Cases. The Court, with Justice Joseph P. Bradley writing for the majority, held that the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was unconstitutional because it sought to regulate individual action, which was appropriately regulated by the state police power and not by the federal government’s authority under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Five cases (Stanley, Ryan, Nichols, Robinson, and Singleton) were eventually consolidated into the Civil Rights Cases. The Court, with Justice Joseph P. Bradley writing for the majority, held that the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was unconstitutional because it sought to regulate individual action, which was appropriately regulated by the state police power and not by the federal government’s authority under the Fourteenth Amendment.
This primary source comes from the Records of District Courts of the United States.
Full Citation: Bond on Capias from United States v. Murray Stanley; 6/7/1876; United States vs. Murray Stanley; Records of District Courts of the United States, Record Group 21. [Online Version, https://www.docsteach.org/documents/document/bond-from-united-states-v-murray-stanley, April 26, 2024]Rights: Public Domain, Free of Known Copyright Restrictions. Learn more on our privacy and legal page.