John F. Kennedy and the Federal Marshals Decision-Making
During the Civil Rights Movement
The Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s was a tense period in the history of the United States. In 1961 the first Catholic was sworn into the office of President of the United States of America, John Fitzgerald Kennedy. He had many challenges to face during his presidency. His early death due to his assassination makes it impossible to predict whether he would have become a stronger supporter of the Civil Rights movement (also known as the Black Freedom movement). President Kennedy may have decided to give most of the responsibility to the Attorney General, Robert Kennedy. Even if he had done that it was still the President’s responsibility to call the U.S. Marshals to duty in order to protect the black children as they entered all-white schools for the first time or to protect activists of diverse races as they protested for equal rights for African-Americans. The U.S. Marshals are responsible for enforcing federal laws, Supreme Court decisions, and upholding the Constitution. They were caught in the middle between the angry white crowds that wanted to keep segregation and the actions and activists that supported integration.
This essay explores the idea that the decisions made by President Kennedy and the U.S. Marshals during the Civil Rights movement were the right ones to make at the time. First this essay gives a brief history, and then three different topics relating to decision-making are discussed. Firstly the decision-making of President Kennedy, secondly the decision-making of the U.S. Federal Marshals and thirdly the questions is asked: were the right decisions made?
History
The United States (U.S.) Federal Marshals hold a unique position in America’s law enforcement system. They are part of the federal justice system. They have a generally broad mission which is to protect and aid the federal judicial system. The president appoints U.S. Marshals to the ninety four federal judicial districts in the country. The purpose of the U.S. Marshals service is to oversee and conduct cases such as find escaped federal prisoners or parolees that have violated their parole. They can arrest criminals and carry firearms when there is a federal warrant on the case. They are also obligated to protect federal judges, jurors and other people who may be threatened due to judicial proceedings. The U.S. Federal Marshals are in charge of protecting federal witnesses who are in danger because of their testimony in front of federal courts.
The mission of the U.S. Federal Marshals is at its foundation a mission to uphold the American Constitution. That is why during the Civil Rights Movement the Marshals were right in the middle of the controversial court orders that directed schools in the south to allow segregation such as the Brown vs. Board of Education decision. It was their job to protect the African American students who were the first to attend segregated schools. They escorted children as small as first graders to school. Many photos from newspapers can be seen in online archives of the Smithsonian Museum. The photos depict for example, small first grader, Ruby Bridges Hall being escorted to school by Federal Marshals. On either side of her path to the school’s front door are angry white adults calling names.
It was President John F. Kennedy’s responsibility to decide when to send the Federal Marshals to protect the 15th and 16th Amendments to the Constitution and Supreme Court decisions. In order to protect the Constitution the Federal Marshals were responsible for protecting the right of African American children and young adults who were attending all white schools for the first time. Many opportunities arose when a decision had to be made. For example on March 13, 1961 the national director of the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), James Farmer called for volunteers to take what were termed “Freedom Rides” throughout the South.1 Freedom riders were people of both black and white races who rode on interstate buses into the South as a call for desegregation. In other words this was one of the strategies used to protest Southern segregation. Freedom riders, both black and white were beaten up and arrested in Alabama, North Carolina, and South Carolina; white mob burned a bus.2 The Freedom Riders lives were at risk so CORE no longer initiated the Freedom Rides. Instead the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) took over and President Kennedy made a decision to protect them. In May 1961 Federal Marshals were sent to the South with orders to protect and make sure the Freedom Riders remained safe.3
A year later on September 30 1962 President Kennedy made an unusual decision because it had never happened in the past. He decided to federalize National Guard members. A young black man, James Meredith was entering law school at the University of Mississippi. The Governor at the time, Ross Barnett, did not approve of a black young man attending a Mississippi Law School. Many other whites in Mississippi were agreed with their governor. President Kennedy sent several hundred Federal Marshals to escort Meredith. There was a huge campus riot leading to the deaths of two people.4
President Kennedy needed to show that he supported the segregation movement. It had become part of the Constitution when slaves were freed and given the vote. It was his job to uphold the Constitution. Also the Brown vs. Board of Education decision by the Supreme Court was a directive for the executive branch to uphold segregation. The Federal Marshals were also directed to protect the young people attending all-white schools for the first time. In 1963 there was a bad situation at the University of Alabama. Alabaman Governor George Wallace arrived on the University of Alabama campus in order to publicly declare his opposition to segregation. He and his handlers may have staged the event to show the Governor as one small citizen versus the power of the mighty federal government.5 In June of 1963 this showdown took place at the University of Alabama as black students were to enter the campus; they were protected by Federal Marshals. Governor Wallace made his speech against desegregation but moved out of the way so the students and their Federal Marshal escorts could pass through and enter the doors of the university administration building. The tensions and riots of the time were very dangerous. The same evening of the day that the black students entered the University of Alabama, Medgar Evans, a leader in the national Association for the Advancement for Colored People (NAACP) was shot and killed by a sniper. In September of the same year four little black girls were killed when a bomb exploded at their church in Birmingham, Alabama.
President John F. Kennedy and his decision making style
Hald-Mortenson has evaluated the leadership qualities of President Kennedy. He noted that generally President Kennedy wanted to hear all the perspectives on an issue and that develop a solution from the information. He would base his decision on what he had learned from others but he would decide for himself on the action to take. The hypothesis for his research was that JFK had a competent decision making style.6 Kennedy had been a member of the U.S. Senate and was experienced with campaigning. He understood his own decision-making style when he entered the White House as President. Hald-Mortenson explained that Kennedy did not want a strong chief-of-staff, because he “intended to be his own chief of staff.” 7 One of the most interesting parts of Hald-Mortenson’s research was the finding that during President Kennedy’s presidency “Domestically, the civil rights struggle dominated the agenda, although JFK throughout most of his presidency ignored the issue.”8 That left the handling of Civil Rights issues to his Attorney General, Robert Kennedy, the president’s brother. Although this was the case J.F.K. was a very assertive president and made many decisions without taking his brothers or anyone else’s advice.9 “Bobby became the administration’s voice and conscience on civil rights matters” but his brother the President did not always agree with Robert Kennedy.10
President Kennedy saw himself as the center of the decision making process, in what has been called the Collegial-Decision Making Model.11 This model can be visualized with the President being at the center of a wheel with the spokes of the wheel leading to his advisors and cabinet members. The collegial team is made up of the group of advisors. They are involved in discussions in order to make group decisions. Everyone is invited to share information. The information sharing process to make a group decision is called “cross fertilization and creative problem solving.”12 In the hierarchy of the White House information system the levels under the advisory team may also add information. In fact that is where the Advisors get there information as it flows up to them from their subordinates. One thing that J.F.K. would do was to speak directly with subordinates to gain information and hear another point of view. 13
Another way to understand his decision-making style is to compare and contrast it to President Eisenhower who was his predecessor. President Eisenhower was also a military leader. What would happen practically is that he would only be faced with decision-making over very important issues. His style was to be given the decisions made by his cabinet members and then act to implement their decisions. J.F.K. on the other hand said he wanted nothing to do with that style. “Occasionally, in the past, I think the staff has been used to get a pre-arranged agreement which is only confirmed at the President’s desk, and that I don’t agree with,” said President Kennedy.14 In fact, Lawson suggests that that the Civil Rights protests had to “capture the kind of national attention that would force the federal government to render sufficient support.”15 Lawson contends that only after the demonstrations and protests, including at Birmingham, was the President moved to finally fully support the freedom movement.
President Lyndon B. Johnson became president after Kennedy was assassinated. Ironically President Johnson whole heartedly supported the Civil Rights Movement from the very beginning of his administration. It is ironic because Johnson was from Texas and considered a conservative. Kennedy was from Massachusetts and considered a liberal. Civil Rights were considered a liberal issue but Kennedy only acted on Civil Rights when it became importnat in the latter part of his administration.
The U.S. Marshals
The U.S. Marshals were organized after George Washington and Congress passed the Judiciary Act on September 24, 1789, “the legislation founded the oldest law enforcement organization.”16 David S. Turk started as the historian for the U.S. Marshals in 2001. He has written that the Brown vs. Board of Education Supreme Court decision in 1954 started a whole new chapter in the duties the U.S. Marshals were expected to handle.
The Court’s ruling empowered the lower courts to protect the educational rights of African-Americans and gave deputy marshals the authority to enforce the integration of schools in the South. . . In the wake of the Brown decision deputy marshals were castigated – even threatened – for their participation in enforcing integration orders.17
The U.S. Federal Marshals had been used before to enforce federal law applying to African-
Americans but the circumstances were very different. The U.S. Marshals in 1850 had been in charge of chasing runaway slaves and returning them to their masters. This was because of the law titled the Compromise of 1850 which included The Fugitive Slave Act.18 After the Civil War the U.S. Marshals were ordered to protect freed slaves from the Ku Klux Klan in the 1870s.19
Some of these examples were mentioned earlier but the timeline of the U.S. Marshals orders to enforce integration was, briefly, as follows. In 1954 the integration of the Little Rock, Arkansas school which was the initial location for desegregation enforcement. After three years the U.S. Marshals were sent to New Orleans; then to enforce Civil Rights legislation in Montgomery, Alabama (1961), Oxford, Mississippi (1962), Tuscaloosa, Alabama (1963), and Selma, Alabama (1965). The riots at the University of Mississippi when George Meredith entered law school are what Turk calls the U.S. Marshalls “modern watershed moment.”20 Hundreds of U.S. Marshals, some of them newly federalized National Guard members, were ensuring the integration of the University of Mississippi against the protests of thousands of angry rioters. What Turk calls the watershed movement means that after that event the U.S. Marshals became organized into one uniform organization. Before that every U.S. Marshal had “his or her own entity as a discrete and separate entity.”21 After the successful stand against the rioters in Mississippi the Office of Chief Marshal was created, badges were made with the same design, and in 1968 an official seal was created.22
The U.S. Marshals do not have any power to make individual decisions. Their mission is to uphold the U.S. Constitution and to enforce federal cases decided by the Supreme Court. They are not allowed decision-making capabilities. Whether or not they are in agreement with the purpose of the law or decision which they must uphold, they must follow orders.
The Correct Decisions about Racism
In 2005 Rachel Moran asked the question “Whatever Happened to Racism?”23 She describes the way that racism was defined from the 1950s to the 1970s in order to compare it to contemporary times. “Racism was a belief that non-Whites were inferior and that Whites should avoid social contact with them.”24 The belief that somehow a black human being was subordinate and inferior to a white human being was at the center of the problem for people who protested integration. She notes that the decisions made during the Civil Rights movement leading the country to integration were made not only by the presidents during the time. She also noted the energy and determination of the judicial branch, the legislative branch and the use of federal executive power to work towards integration. One of the major ways the presidents’ used their executive power was to honor the Supreme Court’s rulings and enforce them by calling in the U.S. Federal Marshalls to protect black people in the Freedom Rides and entering previously all white schools. “Norman Rockwell’s image of Black children entering school under the watchful eyes of federal marshals became a graphic statement of the nation’s commitment to undo the legacy of Jim Crow segregation.”25 Norman Rockwell made a famous painting titled “The Problem We All Live With26.” In the painting the figures are of a small black child and the federal marshals escorting her. But the tension of the time is very clear because the graffiti on the wall over the child’s head reads “Nigger” and was the first time the Saturday Evening Post published a person with dark skin on the cover despite the desires of the advertisers.27
A Harris Survey public opinion poll taken in 1964 showed that 62 percent of Americans supported the right of Blacks to be served in stores, cafes and other public businesses.28 Another public opinion poll (the ORC poll) demonstrated that only 50 percent of the people supported housing equal rights but on the other hand 80 percent were in favor of equal educational, employment and voting rights.29 “Seventy percent supported President Kennedy’s decision to use federal marshals to enforce integration in Alabama.”30 In 1965 about 50 percent of the people in a public opinion poll said they felt the civil rights groups were right and only about 20 percent said that the Alabama state authorities were right in breaking a civil rights march in Selma, Alabama in 1965.31 Strangely though in opinion polls showed that people were not sure about the Civil Rights movement when asked more general questions about it.32
Conclusion
President John F. Kennedy may have been decisive in his decision-making style when it came to many issues but during the first part of his presidency he was slow to show strong support for the Civil Rights movement. Maybe he did not feel the need to do so since his brother, the Attorney General, Robert Kennedy showed support for Civil Rights. On the other hand President Kennedy may have wanted national-wide headline-catching protests for integration before he felt he could make a strong stand on integration. He may have felt that he needed to be seen as following the lead of the majority of the American people before he could use executive powers to support and/or protect the desegregation activists. In the end he did the right thing by using the U.S. Federal Marshals to protect the children and young people entering previously all-white schools and universities. He was also right to send Federal Marshals to protect the Freedom Riders. Without the protection of the U.S. Federal Marshals many more black people and other activists would have been killed. The anger of some people, especially in the South towards changing the schools by integrating them was so out of control that many innocent people died. The anger at the Freedom Riders taking interstate buses was enough to make some group destroy a bus by starting it on fire. There were many tragic deaths but without the decision to use the U.S. Federal Marshals in their capacity to uphold the Supreme Court and federal law many more innocent people would have died.
The U.S. Marshals were in a situation opposite to President Kennedy. According to their oaths they had to uphold laws and judicial decisions regardless of their own opinions. If many of the U. S. Marshals had decided to go against their duties because they did not support integration that would have been very bad. Or if the U.S. Marshals had broken altogether with their responsibilities and decided to side with the segregationists the situation would have become very violent. The President may have then had to decide to use the U.S. Army to protect integrationists against the U.S. Marshals as well as the segregationist public. The fact they acted professionally and decided to uphold their oaths though is a testament to the seriousness of their oaths as U.S. Marshals.
The hypothesis of this essay was that the decisions made by President Kennedy and the U.S. Marshals during the Civil Rights movement were the right ones to make at the time. This turned out to be not entirely correct. President Kennedy was not very engaged with the problems of Civil Rights and the Civil Right movement from the beginning of his administration. It may be that if he had voiced his opinion that equal rights were a national priority perhaps that would have made a positive difference to the amount of violence that took place. Or it may have made integration happen more smoothly. The U.S. Marshals were not in a position to make decisions about their work duties but they could have decided on a personal basis to refuse to carry out their protection duties. But they did not. The U.S. Marshals were strong no matter what challenges faced them from angry crowds. The fact that President Kennedy and the U.S. Marshals made the correct decisions when decisions were made is evident today. Schools and universities are integrated, people of different races marry without incident, and the most important and obvious evidence is that the President of the United States is a dark-skinned, biracial man, President Barack Obama.
Works Cited
Hald-Mortensen, Christian. “John F. Kennedy – Leadership Qualities That Moved a Nation” Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, 2003
Karson, Jill. (Ed.). Opposing Viewpoints in World History: The Civil Rights Movement. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2005
Ken Laird Studios, “’The Problem We All Live With’ - The Truth about Rockwell’s Painting’, Race Issues, The Hubpages, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2012.
Lawson, Steven F. “National Leaders Played th Most Important Role in the Civil Rights Movement” Chapter 4, in Opposing Viewpoints in World History: The Civil Rights Movement. Jill Karson, (Ed.), Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2005, pp. 183 - 194
Moran, Rachel F., “Whatever Happened to Racism” St. John’s Law Review, 79(4): 2005, pp. 899+, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2012 www.questia.com
Public Agenda, n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. <http://www.publicagenda.org/civilrights/civilrights.htm>
Rockwell, Norman. “The Problem We All Live With,” Painting, 1963, Painting, Norman Rockwell museum in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2012, <http://www.nrm.org/>
Turk, David S. “A Brief Primer on the History of the U.S. Marshals Service” The Federal Lawyer, August 2008. Web. 6 Nov. 2012.
