Search Results

Marshall for the Defense

in Henry Ford's War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech

The anti-Semitic articles published by Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent in its May 22, 1920 issue drew different reactions from Jewish religious leaders, intellectuals, activists, and lawyers. Many ... More

The anti-Semitic articles published by Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent in its May 22, 1920 issue drew different reactions from Jewish religious leaders, intellectuals, activists, and lawyers. Many Jews called for action, but the mainstream press, including the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, and Wall Street Journal, was eerily silent. Jewish lawyer Louis Marshall, a renowned leader of American Jewish civil rights activism, sent a telegram to Ford accusing his newspaper of disseminating anti-Semitism that might attract undesirable legal attention because the articles were libelous. Rabbi Leo M. Franklin of Temple Beth-El in Detroit also stepped in to address the Ford situation, but got into an acrimonious exchange with Marshall.Less

American Law, Jewish Solidarity

Libby Garland

in After They Closed the Gates: Jewish Illegal Immigration to the United States, 1921-1965

This chapter explores how established Jewish organizations confronted the legal conundrums the quota laws posed. It examines Jewish leaders’ responses to the illegal immigration of Jews over the ... More

This chapter explores how established Jewish organizations confronted the legal conundrums the quota laws posed. It examines Jewish leaders’ responses to the illegal immigration of Jews over the Mexico-Texas border and to the plight of Jews stranded in Europe with U.S visas rendered defunct by the Immigration Act of 1924. The quota laws posed new dilemmas for American Jewish leaders, pitting their desire to operate in solidarity with Jewish migrants against their need to be regarded as law-abiding Americans. Moreover, there were a number of gray areas that remained in the laws themselves. Jewish leaders exploited this lack of clarity in their efforts to shape the regime of U.S. immigration law as best they could. Whenever possible, they sought to engage in a strategic balancing act, trying to argue the cases of Jewish migrants without seeming to encourage or condone any law-breaking on the part of those migrants.Less

Enforcement Without Law

in Henry Ford's War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech

Even before the impact of Henry Ford's apology that ended his legal battle with Aaron Sapiro could be felt in the United States, Louis Marshall knew that the document would be useful abroad. Aware of ... More

Even before the impact of Henry Ford's apology that ended his legal battle with Aaron Sapiro could be felt in the United States, Louis Marshall knew that the document would be useful abroad. Aware of the fact that American citizens enjoyed constitutional protections, Marshall thought that anti-Semitism had more pernicious effects in other countries, especially in Eastern Europe where Jews were suffering from discrimination and violence. Ford's apology became the basis for his continuing relationship with Marshall, rather than his libel opponents. Ford made several promises that Marshall hoped he would keep, but kept only one: he shut down the Dearborn Independent. In writing the apology, Marshall was hoping that The International Jew, which he dubbed “the Anti-Semites Bible,” would no longer be published in the United States and Europe. Anti-Semitic publishers from Germany and South America challenged both the terms of Ford's apology and the arguments presented by Marshall to substitute the apology for law.Less

Apology, Retractions, and Recriminations

in Henry Ford's War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech

Judge Fred M. Raymond's declaration of a mistrial in Sapiro v. Ford ended the public drama between Henry Ford and Aaron Sapiro, but not their legal battle. The two parties were expected to return to ... More

Judge Fred M. Raymond's declaration of a mistrial in Sapiro v. Ford ended the public drama between Henry Ford and Aaron Sapiro, but not their legal battle. The two parties were expected to return to court, but Ford decided to end the dispute outside the courtroom. To do so, he enlisted an unlikely ally, Louis Marshall, who was watching the developments from the sidelines. The “Jewish question” that emerged during the trial reawakened Marshall's concerns about the implications of the case for Jewish civil rights. He believed that the case was not in accord with the strategy that he and the American Jewish Committee had maintained for more than six years. In Detroit, Raymond arranged a hearing to discuss a new trial date. Meanwhile, the Ford Motor Company was undergoing a big transformation as it tried to endure sluggish sales. This chapter focuses on the settlement negotiations between Ford and Sapiro that eventually led to the former's issuance of an apology that was written by Marshall himself.Less

A Personal and Confidential Letter to Louis Marshall (1917)

Abraham Cahan

in Jewish Radicals: A Documentary History

This chapter presents a letter from Abraham Cahan, editor of the Yiddish daily Forverts (also called Forward in English), to Louis Marshall, prominent attorney and head of the American Jewish ... More

This chapter presents a letter from Abraham Cahan, editor of the Yiddish daily Forverts (also called Forward in English), to Louis Marshall, prominent attorney and head of the American Jewish Committee. Marshall's intercession had been required due to the threat of rescission of the paper's second-class mailing privileges, which would likely have bankrupted it. The letter stresses Forverts's policy to uphold the law and remain silent on any content that could, either in letter or in spirit, be interpreted as a breach or disregard of any of the laws enacted by the government for the purpose of prosecuting America's entry into World War I—an issue that the daily had previously contested—or which might be regarded as inimical to the government.Less

Jewish Diplomacy at a Crossroads

David Engel

in 1929: Mapping the Jewish World

This chapter examines Jewish diplomacy in the year 1929, with particular emphasis on the deaths of three individuals: Louis Marshall, Leon Reich, and Lucien Wolf. It first considers the significance ... More

This chapter examines Jewish diplomacy in the year 1929, with particular emphasis on the deaths of three individuals: Louis Marshall, Leon Reich, and Lucien Wolf. It first considers the significance for Jewish–Arab relations of the convening of the Constituent Assembly of the Jewish Agency for Palestine on August 14, 1929, in Zürich. It then discusses the arguments of Marshall, Reich, and Wolf as staunch advocates and prime movers of the conception that predicated security for Jews on the restriction of state sovereignty by agencies of the international community. It also explains how a crisis in Zionist–British relations forced the non-Zionists who had joined the Jewish Agency to close ranks behind the Zionist leadership. It argues that the deaths of Marshall, Reich, and Wolf symbolized the end of one era and the beginning of another.Less

Introduction

in Henry Ford's War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech

In the 1920s, Aaron Sapiro, a Jewish lawyer from California, filed a libel case against Henry Ford and his newspaper, the Dearborn Independent. Sapiro's lawsuit stemmed from a series of articles ... More

In the 1920s, Aaron Sapiro, a Jewish lawyer from California, filed a libel case against Henry Ford and his newspaper, the Dearborn Independent. Sapiro's lawsuit stemmed from a series of articles published by the newspaper which accused him of spearheading a Jewish conspiracy to subvert American agriculture. The case, Sapiro v. Ford, was declared a mistrial after the legal process was derailed by a series of bizarre events. To avoid a new trial, Ford issued an apology to the Jews in July 1927. The apology was penned by another Jewish lawyer, the renowned civil rights leader Louis Marshall. This book examines the complex triangulated relationships linking Ford and the two Jewish lawyers and explores how Sapiro and Marshall, who were supposed to be allies in the fight against anti-Semitism because both of them were Jews, almost failed to stop Ford in his war on their fellow Jews. This book also reflects on the historical development of the First Amendment by revealing divisions in the civil liberties community over how to respond to hate speech.Less

Conclusion

in Henry Ford's War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech

Sapiro v. Ford left a number of unanswered questions, such as what jurors would have decided had the libel suit run its course. While a jury verdict and damage award might have been personally ... More

Sapiro v. Ford left a number of unanswered questions, such as what jurors would have decided had the libel suit run its course. While a jury verdict and damage award might have been personally gratifying for Aaron Sapiro, they would have further alienated him from Louis Marshall and the Jewish civil rights establishment and probably caused a rift among Jews. The jurors appeared to be skeptic toward Henry Ford and the allegations against Sapiro, and aware that Sapiro had made mistakes and that the cooperative movement was flawed. However, they rejected the notion that a conspiracy was responsible for the farmers' misfortunes. The case should have ended Ford's public career, but his apology bought him viability. Anti-Semitism persisted in American society as an acceptable, respectable prejudice after Sapiro v. Ford. Nevertheless, the case displayed Sapiro's heroism and bravery in confronting a national bully like Ford and Marshall's hope that the apology he wrote for Ford would create a permanent place for immigrant Jews in America's industrial future.Less