Though the NAACP, SCLC, and SNCC were all
committed to nonviolence and peaceful means of protesting racial
inequality, they used different strategies to desegregate the South.
Despite the fact that the SCLC and SNCC received more media attention
in the 1950s
and 1960s,
it was the NAACP’s legal victories that were most successful in
fundamentally overturning the South’s system of Jim Crow laws.
In 1957,
Martin Luther King Jr. formed the Southern Christian Leadership
Conference (SCLC) to coordinate peaceful protests—akin to the Montgomery
bus boycott that had taken place two years earlier—against southern
Jim Crow laws. He hoped that the peaceful-protest movement would
gather momentum and that he would be able to rally the support of
black churches—a tactic that worked well, because of the central
role that the church played in the southern black community. King
found his inspiration in the nonviolent protest tactics of Mohandas
Gandhi and hoped, ironically, that “passive resistance” would provoke
segregationists to attack his peaceful protests, attracting media
attention. He knew that the movement would need media-generated
sympathy from moderate whites in order to have any lasting effect.
Whereas King organized southern black churches, the Student Nonviolent
Coordinating Committee (SNCC) brought together like-minded students.
Ella Baker, an SCLC director, formed the SNCC along with a group
of activist students after the highly successful Greensboro sit-in
in 1960.
The SNCC worked diligently to mobilize black and white students
in the North and South to work and protest for the civil rights
cause. The SNCC organized hundreds of sit-ins, boycotts, and other
peaceful protests across the country to end segregation in restaurants,
stores, public transportation, and other common areas. The SNCC’s
tactics were highly successful and gave the movement a badly needed
boost after the SCLC failed to draw enough media attention. The
SNCC organized or participated in nearly every major civil rights
campaign of the 1960s.
Even though the SCLC and SNCC led highly successful campaigns,
the courtroom victories of the National Association for the Advancement
of Colored People (NAACP) had the most lasting effect on the movement’s
goal to desegregate the South. Had the NAACP not won these victories,
it is doubtful that the movement would ever have gained as much
momentum as it did. Thurgood Marshall, a brilliant lawyer working
for the NAACP, attacked the “separate but equal” doctrine that justified
segregation, winning a number of significant cases, including Missouri
ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (1938), Morgan
v. Virginia (1946),
and Sweatt v. Painter (1950).
Marshall finally scored a direct hit on the “separate but equal”
doctrine in 1954 with
the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Brown v. Board of Education
of Topeka, Kansas, decision. Marshall
won a unanimous verdict with the help of Chief Justice Earl Warren,
a conservative appointee who proved more sympathetic to
the civil rights movement than expected. The Brown v. Board of
Education ruling stated that segregated public schools
were inherently unequal and should be integrated as soon as possible—effectively
reversing the 1896 Plessy
v. Ferguson decision, which had made and kept “separate
but equal” law. This legal victory sent a message to activists throughout
the country that sweeping civil rights reform was possible and imminent,
prompting both black and white activists such as King, Rosa
Parks, James Meredith, and student volunteers in the SNCC to take
a stand and fight for integration. Without the NAACP and the Brown
v. Board of Education decision, the SCLC and SNCC arguably
would have never even formed.
Though the SCLC, SNCC, and NAACP had the uniform goal
of integrating the United States, the formation of the NAACP and
its legal victories in the 1940s
and 1950s
were the most effective steps toward concrete desegregation of the
South in the mid-twentieth century. The NAACP’s victories laid the
foundation for the civil rights movement and empowered blacks everywhere
to organize and fight for equal social, political, and economic
rights.