Why was President Andrew Johnson opposed to the Civil Rights Act of 1866?

Johnson not only vetoed the bill but he also attacked it as race legislation that would encourage a life of wasteful laziness for Southern blacks.

Congress and the President clashed continually over the next two years. In the ensuing confrontation, the Republican membership in Congress united in support of a military Reconstruction program that would guarantee political and civil rights for Southern blacks. Johnson aided this party unity by his heavy-handed efforts to block black suffrage and congressional programs that he considered a usurpation of presidential authority.

When Congress passed an extension of the Freedmen's Bureau in February of 1866, most Republicans fully expected Johnson to sign it into law. Congress wanted this agency to continue a federal refugee program aimed at protecting and providing shelter and provisions for the displaced slaves as well as trials by military commissions of individuals accused of depriving African Americans of their civil rights.

To Congress's surprise, Johnson not only vetoed the bill but he also attacked it as race legislation that would encourage a life of wasteful laziness for Southern blacks. In response, Congress passed this bill five months later over Johnson's veto.

President Johnson also vetoed the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1866, which defined as citizens all persons born in the United States (except Native Americans). The bill also listed certain rights of citizens, including the right to testify in court, to own property, to make contracts, and to enjoy the "full and equal benefit of all laws" and the due process accorded to all citizens. It authorized federal officials to bring suit in federal courts rather than state courts for civil rights violations. Johnson tried to strike down the law as a violation of states' rights, expecting his veto to appeal to anti black sentiment among Northern voters. In April, Congress passed the act over Johnson's veto -- this was the first time that Congress had overridden a veto of major legislation.

As tensions mounted further, Johnson's determination to deny civil rights to African Americans motivated the Joint Committee on Reconstruction to formulate the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Fearful that the Supreme Court might at some future date rule unconstitutional the Civil Rights Act, Congress passed this far-reaching amendment on June 16, 1866. For the first time, the nation's lawmakers defined national citizenship, which authorized the federal government to protect the rights of U.S. citizens. Congress also revoked the three-fifths clause of the Constitution, and it now provided for a proportionate reduction in representation when a state denied suffrage to any male citizen, except for those who have participated in rebellion or other crimes. When most Southern states rejected the amendment, the Joint Committee made its acceptance a condition of a state's restoration to the Union.

Civil Rights Act Of 1866 Summary

Here's my answer. Both parties throughout history have done things to eradicate African-Americans. And yes it still continues today. With the simple fact of how "some" Republicans are responding to our president being part African/black. What America stands for now and what it stood for then are totally different principles. And to comment on "lazy black people" is very ignorant. The truth is that there are lazy people in every culture. But at the same time, certain cultures haven't been given equal opportunities as others. But if you trulylook at things based on percentages. There are a higher percentage of African American kids going to college per capita than any other culture in the U.S. Also, the southern Democrats that you are talking about are now southern Republicans.

Johnson didn't think that blacks deserved the rights and privileges that

would have been accorded them under the Act. It was pure racism.

He thought that the bill enumerated specific rights for blacks that were

not enumerated for whites, which simply was a way to rationalize his

not vetoing the bill. The Congress didn't buy it, and overrided his veto.