Did Jim Crow Laws help blacks?

Answer 1

No

M

Answer 2

No. Jim Crow laws were a hindrance in the progress of the people. We are all Americans. Unfortunately, less than 60 years ago, the government legally denied rights to blacks. Now, an entire race of people are trying to play catch up while many people (with their passed down ignorance and racism in hand) are still trying to hold us back.

Answer 3

I can't imagine how anybody could conceivably argue that Jim Crow laws helped blacks. These laws took away many of the rights they supposedly received by way of the 14th amendment, including the right to vote, the right to associate, the right of free speech, the right of religious freedom. They institutionalized segregration in the South and enforced substandard everything in the black communities.

Answer 4

Jim Crow laws were enacted to hinder the blacks in becoming a full part of society. They were attempts to keep the second class citizens by denying their rights to vote, to own a firearm, etc.

Answer 5

no. they were segregation laws. The only people that the Jim Crow laws helped were the stuck up whites cause they wouldn't share the same anything with blacks

Answer 6

The thirteenth Ammendment Abolished Slavery, the wonderful wording is as follows: a million. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, different than as a punishment for crime whereof the social gathering shall have been duly convicted, shall exist interior of america, or everywhere undertaking to their jurisdiction. 2. Congress shall have ability to enforce this text by potential of suitable law. No regulations or criminal action that i'm conscious ever circumscribed the thirteenth ammendment. as quickly as slavery became into abolished, that became into the tip of it. The 14th ammendment, besides the undeniable fact that, assured equivalent protection and rights under the regulation to all electorate. various placed up civil war regulations have been enacted which "have been given around" this assure by potential of arguing that amenities and protections ought to be "Separate, yet equivalent." This became into the racial segregation, mostly in the south, for just about a hundred years following the civil war.

Answer 7

Considering that they were laws which segregated blacks from whites in social settings, restricted them in housing and jobs they could have, blocked them from voting, forced them to use substandard services and attend underfunded and lousy schools, and basically kept them in a subordinate position, I would say NO!

There wasn't any help coming from the courts either, as the Supreme Court said in 1896 in the Plessy vs. Ferguson case that the segregation laws were legal.

Answer 8

No. Those laws were to keep African Americans down.

Answer 9

no not at all they were set up to limit all there freedoms especialy those to vote

Answer 10

no they provided little equality and much segregation

Answer 11

Uhm No.