1964 California Proposition 14

[1] In 1966, the California Supreme Court in a 5–2 split decision declared Proposition 14 unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution (Fourteenth Amendment).

[5] This was part of a decades-long campaign by real estate interests to undercut the rights of minority groups in regard to housing facilities in California.

[6] In 1942, in response to the success of some Negroes in moving out of the Los Angeles ghetto and into traditionally all white neighborhoods, the California Real Estate Association formed its Race Restriction Committee.

[5] In 1948, the United States Supreme Court in Shelley v. Kraemer precluded judicial enforcement of racially restrictive housing covenants.

[7] Prior to 1948, the California Real Estate Association routinely promoted and enforced racially restrictive housing covenants to prevent family homes from ending up in the hands of minorities, particularly Negroes.

"[10] In further support of the constitutional amendment, the publication stated: "Moreover, the prices of homes in such areas are well within the purchasing power of vast numbers of Negroes.

... Additionally, the insistence of some Negroes upon moving into areas previously restricted exclusively to the occupancy of Caucasians will necessarily create racial tensions and antagonisms and do much harm to our national social structure.

[22] Following the assassination of President John Kennedy on November 22, 1963, tremendous pressure was placed on the California Real Estate Association to call off their initiative campaign to repeal the Rumford Fair Housing Act.

At a time when our nation is moving ahead on civil rights, it proposes to convert California into another Mississippi or Alabama and to create an atmosphere for violence and hate.

"[28] Following much publicity the proposition gained the endorsement of many large conservative political groups, including the John Birch Society and the California Republican Assembly.

H. H. Brookins, chairman of the United Civil Rights Committee, said: "It no longer is possible for proponents of Proposition 14 to hide their real intention, which is to legalize segregation in housing.

"[31] Other opponents of Proposition 14, including the AFL-CIO Los Angeles County Labor Federation, also demanded that the California Real Estate Association fire its Southern California publicity director who had written extensively for the White Citizens' Council magazine, and who stated during a campaign town hall meeting in Los Angeles: "The people have the right to discriminate if they want to.

[32] In endorsing Proposition 14, the Los Angeles Times stated: "One of man’s most ancient rights in a free society is the privilege of using and disposing of his private property in whatever manner he deems appropriate."

"[33][34][35] According to the Los Angeles Times, the ability to discriminate against home buyers or renters by race, color, and creed was considered a "basic property right.

"[26] In a letter-to-the-editor response to the Times' endorsement of Proposition 14, then-California Attorney General Stanley Mosk stated: "I oppose the segregation initiative.

Governor Brown stated that passage of Proposition 14 would put into California's Constitution "a provision for discrimination of which not even Mississippi or Alabama can boast.

"[37] Previously, Governor Brown had likened the campaign for Proposition 14 to "another hate binge which began more than 30 years ago in a Munich beer hall.

[42] A 2018 study in the American Political Science Review found that white voters in areas which experienced massive African-American population growth between 1940 and 1960 were more likely to vote for Proposition 14.

[47] Reitman established a significant precedent because it held that state assistance or encouragement of private discrimination violated the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment.

[48] Similar to Proposition 14, there have been subsequent efforts by the real estate industry to promote ballot measures in California to generate more profits at the alleged expense of minorities.