The Case of Pete Hernandez

I recently had the honor to research the case of Pete Hernandez. I had been thinking about a topic to write for my Senior Seminar Class. I decided to write about Pete Hernandez because for the longest time, I never heard of a Mexican civil rights movement. Sure, I had heard about Cesar Chavez, but to me, he just was focusing on farm workers, what about everyone else? When the opportunity came, I asked my professor about some influential Mexican American civil rights cases. He mentioned Pete Hernandez, after reading some articles, I decided to take Pete on. When I saw where the case was "born", I realized...this was close to home. Edna, TX is a small south Texas town. My sorority sister Valerie happens to be related to Joe Espinosa, the man who was murdered by Pete Hernandez. I've included my Senior Seminar historiographical essay. It isn't the complete paper, but mentions what I would be discussing in my paper. I wrote 20 pages on this subject, spent an incredible amount of time going to the library looking through microfiche. Pete Hernandez started a domino effect that would lead to others seeking equal treatment. Many Mexican Americans, Chicano/a's, Latino/a 's, Mexicans...etc are unaware that since the signing of the TREATY OF GUADALUPE HILDALGO in 1848 Mexicans were considered White. They could own land, and do basically anything the white man could. The whites were confused what to consider Mexicans because there were only three "colors".. White, Black and Indian... The Mexican did not fit in these categories. Anyways, I'm very passionate about this case, I've spent a lot of time getting to know who Pete was and how his main counsel Gus Garcia [of San Antonio] was an excellent and charismatic attorney. So here it goes:

In a landmark case that would give Mexican American’s protection under the fourteenth amendment[1], unlike the African American struggle, the Mexican American fight for equality in south Texas was not one that had laws against basic rights. The case of Pete Hernandez v. Texas was one that would challenge the United States view of Mexican Americans and would finally see them classified as their own race.

Pete Hernandez was a poorly educated farm worker who murdered Joe Espinosa in Edna, a small south Texas town. The murder of Joe Espinosa was open and shut, but the discrimination in the South Texas court system was not. Berkley Law professor Ian Haney Lopez has written on the subject of the Mexican American struggle for equality. He notes in his book White by Law: the Legal Construction of Race that “White” as a category of human identity and difference is an enormous complex phenomenon.[2] Indeed, it is a concept hard to understand, why would Mexican American’s ever want to be anything other than white? The Mexican American would fight for being a class of its own, separate from the black and white world, opening the door for other racial groups to seek equality. In the case of Pete Hernandez V. Texas this was the first time a Mexican American had ever brought a case to the Supreme Court before. Though considered “white” in the eyes of the law, Mexican Americans were treated as second rate citizens, unintelligent, and invisible[3]. Lopez notes that the law constructs race[4] and whoever is considered white is determined by the judicial system.

“A Class Apart” is a documentary detailing the Pete Hernandez case and the Mexican American’s need to create a racial category that they could fit into. Mexican Americans were treated much like the African American. They too were discriminated against throughout South Texas, and were lynched, shot and not served at various establishments. There was a sign that read “No Mexicans, No Niggers or dogs” [5] this was to send a message to Mexican Americans, and the African Americans residing in the south that they were just a level above animals and had no place in a normal productive society. To be white, was to be privileged and since Mexican Americans did not fit the legal definition of black, they must be considered white, but this classification was not new. Mexicans were classified as white when Mexico and the United States of America signed the Treaty of Guadalupe which states in article nine that “The Mexicans who, in the territories aforesaid, shall not preserve the character of citizens of the Mexican Republic, conformably with what is stipulated in the preceding article, shall be incorporated into the Union of the United States. and be admitted at the proper time (to be judged of by the Congress of the United States) to the enjoyment of all the rights of citizens of the United States, according to the principles of the Constitution; and in the mean time, shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, and secured in the free exercise of their religion without; restriction.”[6] Since the nineteenth century, Mexicans were not governed by laws that stopped their basic rights like African Americans, but by a silent code that caused Mexicans and Africans alike to wonder which one was worse.

The legal system found many loopholes to justify their discrimination against the Mexican American. If a Mexican American was to bring a case to the courts, they would simply state that there was “an absence of Civil Rights Legislation”[7] making their decision to continue discrimination against the Mexican American justified. Hernandez v. Texas was taken on by a charismatic lawyer named Gustavo ‘Gus’ Garcia[8] who on October 8, 1957, pleaded not guilty on behalf of his client but then immediately raised an objection stating that Hernandez’ sixth amendment[9] right had been violated by Jackson County. Within four hours an all white jury convicted Pete Hernandez of murder and sentenced him to life in prison. Gus Garcia was not trying to condone Hernandez’s act of violence for which he was clearly guilty[10]; he wanted to battle the discrimination that Mexican Americans in South Texas had been subjected to. Garcia along with other prominent Mexican American lawyers from Houston and San Antonio began to build the case for the Supreme Court. Among the many arguments they had prepared, Garcia’s most effective was that while in the Jackson County court house he needed to relieve himself, and upon attempting to enter the bathroom which had a large sign across it stating “Whites Only”, was told by a janitor [in Spanish] that he could not use that bathroom. He followed the janitor to the back bathroom that stated it was for “Blacks Here and Hombres Aqui (men here).” Gus argued that in a court house, where justice is supposed to be blind, there was racial divisions, a so called “white” man could not use the bathroom assigned to him. This type of mistreatment was something that Garcia wanted to eradicate from the court system, but he would not be met with complete support from his fellow Mexican Americans.

It was clear that the white people who lived in south Texas were very content with the racial caste system that they had essentially developed. Ian Haney Lopez states that “If Mexican Americans had served on juries that judged whites; that would have said that Mexican Americans were the equal of whites, and that they were capable of sitting in judgment on whites.”[11] Essentially, Gus Garcia and the rest of the council were trying to achieve something that had never been done before, and they wanted Mexican Americans to be protected under the fourteenth amendment. Some Mexican Americans however, feared this would place them on the same level as African Americans, while they had only been a level or two above them, they would both have equal standing and this was very frightening to Mexican Americans.[12] The case was finally accepted to be heard by the court justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Though monumental for Hernandez v. Texas, Garcia faced another dilemma; many people who lived on the east coast had no idea what a Mexican American was. Gus Garcia would have to lay the foundation that would define a race, this was no longer about Pete Hernandez the individual, it was about the Mexican American, living in the United States. Garcia had to prove to the Supreme Court that Hernandez had indeed been denied his sixth amendment right and that he deserved a real trial by his peers, and he wanted to guarantee to the Mexican American people that they would have a voice in the court system.

My research has been very beneficial to discovering the route I would like to take my paper. I began focusing on the Hernandez V. Texas when I realized that my paper should not just be about civil rights cases in Texas, but that it should focus on the discrimination of a people, that went unnoticed until Hernandez V. Texas. I began realizing that much of my family had lived around Edna, TX during this time in a small south Texas town called Sinton. I realized that I had primary sources in the form of oral histories. This paper became much bigger than Hernandez V. Texas, it amazes me that my grandmother and aunts and uncles had no idea about this case. This landmark case provided the Mexican American to be protected under the fourteenth amendment. After Hernandez V. Texas succeeded, many groups began pushing for equal rights and to tear down barriers that had prevented them from enjoying their inalienable rights. The Mexican Americans struggle for equality in South Texas was not one that I understood until I began researching the case. I would say I was naïve about the struggle Mexicans Americans went through, I didn’t feel that we [Mexican Americans] had any real reason to be upset about being discriminated against, because no laws were ever made against us that prohibited our basic way of living. Though African Americans had the Jim Crow Laws[13], Mexican Americans had a social code placed upon them that could be changed at any time, without being voted on, which one was worse? They both were equally harmful to both races and affected them in several ways, some similar and some different. I plan to use my research to examine the types of social and racial prejudice that Mexican Americans in south Texas experienced and who sought to tear down those barriers.

The landmark civil rights case of Hernandez V. Texas opened the door for many Mexican Americans who were classified as white citizens since the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, to stake a claim in American civil right history allowing them to piece together their identity as Mexican Americans.

---

[1] All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[2] Lopez, Ian, White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race, xxi

[3] American Experience; A Class Apart, 1

[4] White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race, 7

[5] American Experience; A Class Apart, 1

[6] Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (www.mexica.net/guadhida.php)

[7] Valencia, Reynaldo. Mexican Americans and the Law. Adela de la Torre. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 2004. (p11)

[8] Became lead counsel for Pete Hernandez

[9] In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

[10] Hernandez guilt was never called into question; there were many eye witness accounts that proved he had indeed intended to kill Joe Espinosa. Joe Espinosa was shot by a rifle after making fun of Pete’s bum leg and saying that no woman would ever want him.

[11] American Experience: A Class A Part, 2

[12] Feared they would now have to identify with the African American and that they would now have laws in place that prohibited their freedom.

[13]The Jim Crow laws were state and local laws in the United States enacted between 1876 and 1965. They mandated de jure racial segregation in all public facilities, with a supposedly "separate but equal" status for black Americans. In reality, this led to treatment and accommodations that were usually inferior to those provided for white Americans, systematizing a number of economic, educational and social disadvantages. (Wikipedia.com)

My Take on the Tudor Dynasty...

I wrote this paper in 2008 for a history class. Don't steal this. lol

January of 1547 found King Henry VIII ill and on his death bed grossly overweight and suffering from gout and covered with boils. During his reign he had managed to marry six women, break away from the Catholic Church and establish the Church of England. His wives, two of which were beheaded on the basis of treason and only three would bear him children, would know King Henry VIII as a man devoted to excelling himself, all the while pleasing his libido. The children who would later be known as King Edward VI, Queen Mary I, and Queen Elizabeth I were affected by King Henry VIII’s selfish and often careless decisions. Edward would be the first Tudor to rule but under the close eye of his uncle Duke of Somerset[1], his reign displayed his own feebleness and lack of training by those around him to become King. Edward would be Henry’s main priority in the years before his own death. Mary I would be next in succession, her attempt to return England to its true religion made her rule a bloody one. Elizabeth I would be the last of the children to take on the English realm. She had many successes as a Queen but would suffer much as her older sister did in personal matters. The children of Henry VIII would find themselves relying on the advice of others. Though not always close only Edward and Elizabeth showed utter devotion to their father and his memory, even emulating him through paintings and how they were addressed by their court. Mary would be the only one of Henry’s children to try returning England to how it once was, trying to capture the time before Anne Boleyn. Henry’s mistakes regarding his marriages made the lives of his children more difficult and with each new child he had after Mary a fight for the throne and their fathers approval ensued. Although Henry VIII had three children who would take the throne in sixteenth and seventeenth century England, they would all be affected by Henry VIII’s personal and political decisions which would be both detrimental and beneficial to his children and their rule as well as England.

Edward VI

Edward Tudor was born to Henry VIII and his wife Queen Jane Seymour. Much awaited for by his father, Edward was doted on the instant he was born. His mother had passed from a fever caused by giving birth. Nonetheless, Edward was immediately kept in a sterile environment to protect his health[2]. Many portraits by the famed Hans Holbein that portray Henry and his children often show Edward at his right side while his hand rests upon his shoulders, Mary and Elizabeth are both separated by pillars.[3] King Edward VI was crowned in 1547 at the age of nine. He was to be under the arm of his uncle Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset for his entire reign. Edward VI was to keep a chronicle during his reign, discussing foreign and domestic affairs, religion and his sisters. He was closer to Elizabeth and held contempt for Mary due to her religion. Artistic depictions of Edward show him carrying a golden dagger much like his father and in his father’s customary position.[4] Though his reign was short he excelled in state matters. Raised Protestant at Catherine Parr’s urging[5] Edward began making headway for the Church of England. It was due to Edwards’s persistence that the Church of England transformed into a strict Protestant body. He also insisted that the Book of Common Prayer[6] be used and that Catholic mass be abolished. This did not please his older sister Mary, who was now forbidden from attending mass; it was a threat from the Emperor of Spain that he allowed his sister to continue her heresy. Though he was a child he rarely showed any behaviors of a child his age. He was known for his tantrums of anger but they quickly passed. Henry VIII’s lack of guidance made Edward susceptible to being manipulated. Edward’s uncle Thomas Seymour was so anxious to remove his brother The Duke of Somerset as Lord Protector of Edward that he had plotted to kidnap the young King. “As he [Thomas] unlocked the door leading from the antechamber into the royal bedroom, Edward’s loyal Spaniel leaped at him [Thomas], Seymour drew his gun and shot the dog dead…As Edward stood, pale and terrified in his nightshirt.”[7] Edward made no mention of this in his chronicle; however he did sign the death warrant for his uncle’s treason[8]. Edward’s reign was not entirely his own. Manipulated by both uncles to pass reforms that were in the best interest of England and to rule in their favor damaged this young King. Edward VI passed away from tuberculosis at the age of fifteen[9] and urging those who would listen not to make Mary the next in line to the throne[10], he was afraid she would undo many of his reforms and attempt to bring England back to its natural and true religion. Edward’s lack of training from Henry VIII caused his reign to be manipulated to please others, however he was the least affected child of Henry VIII’s.

Mary I

Henry VIII affected his daughters reign by marrying a protestant woman Anne Boleyn who would also be the source of much pain. Plagued with sickness Mary Tudor lived a very painful life. She was claimed illegitimate after the annulment of her parent’s marriage. She went on to live without Catherine who was banished from court and was raised in the faith of her mother, a devout Catholic. She did not get along with her father after the annulment as he became a tyrant. She was also ridiculed by her father’s new Queen Anne Boleyn. “Anne always treated Mary with calculated cruelty, heaping humiliations on her and urging the King to have her put to death.”[11] Mary did enjoy a rather brief and happy childhood, after being separated from her father and mother for three years and placed in a separate house, she was more devoted to her mother so the separation was not a big feat for Mary to overcome; “What it did give her was three more years to grow up in peace and relative contentment, away from the looming crisis which was about to break over the court.”[12] Mary in her thirties was promised to Prince Philip of Spain. They were married even through protests and it is said the new king felt no real love for his new wife. D.M. Loades is a historian who specializes in Early Modern English History; he makes this known in his description of Mary as a head over heels newlywed. “A woman starved of affection and personal attentions since her early childhood, she responded to Phillip’s skillful and discreet advances with wholeheartedness.” [13] The irony is that Mary’s strong belief in marriage after the disaster of her mother and father’s marriage as well as her own, displays her piety. At all costs of being a dutiful Catholic, she believed she needed guidance from her husband in the affairs of the state.[14] She also was keenly aware that she needed to give her husband an heir in order to solidify the succession of her family as well as her religion. It is not known whether Mary understood their marriage to be strictly political as Philip viewed it but it pained her to have him be gone to govern his other kingdoms for such long periods of time. Anne’s marriage to Mary’s father would be the root cause of the ‘Marian Persecutions.[15]’ These persecutions would make the once beloved queen, Bloody Mary. She refused to let her younger sister Elizabeth out of prison for fear that her sister would attempt to join a rebellion to over throw her.[16] Mary was a rigid woman as she grew older pained by cysts on her uterus that caused her to believe she was pregnant.[17] Mary’s ultimate decision to remain Catholic and to return England to its original faith did not put her subjects at ease. The Marian Persecutions only reassured her subject’s beliefs that Catholics were inherently evil and public outcry ensued. In the minds of the English Catholicism was increasingly becoming identified with brutal persecution, and many longed for the Queen to die. The plots to over throw her became increasingly real. Elizabeth however comforted her sister when Phillip refused to return to England unless he was crowned. Mary could not make such decisions without parliaments consent. It became obvious that Phillip was to return only for political reasons. Once his wife was proven barren he immediately left her, coming to England only to give Mary an heir and when that failed, he retreated, leaving Mary to feel God had withdrawn his favor from her. Mary lay on her death bed and pronounced that her much detested sister be named Heir to the throne. [18]

Elizabeth I

The skillful daughter of a cunning Queen, Elizabeth I would prove to be the only Tudor to be more adored than her father during his reign. Henry VIII had his daughter’s mother put upon the execution block after failing to produce a male heir. Anne Boleyn was executed three years after Elizabeth’s birth. Elizabeth was a constant reminder of her mother’s Protestantism and cunning, Henry had her declared illegitimate and sent to live in her mother’s house which she was allowed to keep after her death. Elizabeth was brought back into favor with much thanks owed to her step mother Katherine Parr. After the brief reunion Elizabeth attempted to stay in her father’s favor. After her father’s death she was sent to live with Dowager Queen Katherine Parr. It was in that arrangement that she would come into contact with Thomas Seymour who had wed the Dowager Queen with the consent of Edward VI. Elizabeth was involved in a scandal with Thomas Seymour in which she was questioned about the nature of their affair. Displaying her father’s stubbornness she refused to answer any questions.[19] According to her nurse Kat Ashley who did not mind the way Seymour showed affection to Lady Elizabeth “He would come many mornings into the Lady Elizabeth’s chamber before she was ready, and sometimes before she did rise…and strike her upon the back or on the buttocks familiarly.”[20] Elizabeth moved past this and grew up to be one of the most educated women in all of England. She succeeded her sister Mary in 1558 and crowned in 1559. She was welcomed by all of England who had seen the horror of Bloody Mary’s reign. Within days of Mary’s death, according to the Count de Feria who was sent by Philip of Spain to preside over a meeting of the Privy Council in which Elizabeth’s succession was confirmed believed that the late Queen’s policies were being scathingly criticized, and Elizabeth had ordered the persecution heretics to cease.[21] Elizabeth was religiously tolerant, she re-established the Church of England after she was excommunicated from the Catholic Church. This move would officially make the Church of England Protestant. William Cecil was one of her most beloved advisors and she greatly relied on him for many things. Elizabeth was quite known for having “favorites”, with these men she was happy to give affection to. However, at a young age Elizabeth had desperately craved the attention and affection of her father and Elizabeth enjoyed the same power over her favorites and prospected husbands yearning for her love. She took some pleasure in denying them of her, just as she was initially denied by her father after Edward’s birth. Though her refusal to enter into a marriage only broadened her political powers. Elizabeth entertained various marriage proposals in order for the issues of the state to continue. Elizabeth yearned to be recognized as much as her father had during his reign and would insist she be referred to as “his majesty” when being introduced. Henry VIII had more of a positive effect on Elizabeth than on Edward or Mary. Elizabeth would go on to rule England for forty-five years and endure hardships towards the end of her reign, but none the less she was considered one of the most beloved Queen’s of English history.
Henry VIII and his three children would be affected by his careless and selfish decisions. His children were influenced in their reigns and they also felt the severity of their father’s decisions in both personal and political matters. This would cause a family to be at odds. Once meeting Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth’s mother, He quickly claimed Mary as illegitimate and separated her from her mother Catherine of Aragon. This would be the stepping stone for the many problems his children would face in their reigns. The divorce would cause Mary much grief and would be the main reason behind her vicious rule and her willingness to put people to death who did not strictly obey her orders. Edward VI was to be the first of Henry’s children to rule the realm of England, though he could not rule with an iron fist, he was the least affected by his father’s decisions. Elizabeth I would be the last Tudor to rule England. She would take heed in matters of the state and be tolerant of others. She would also use being single to her advantage in making treaties with other countries. Each of his children would find that their father’s personal inclination for love and decision to reform England partly for Anne Boleyn and partly to remove the Church of England from foreign rule, would mean they would all be emotionally stunted.

---

[1] Duke of Somerset was Edward Seymour, Jane Seymour’s brother.

[2] Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII. (New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996)

[3] Unknown, Tudor Family Painting, 1545

[4] Guillaume Scrots, King Edward VI, portrait, unknown

[5] Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII. (New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996)

[6] The Book of Common Prayer was a set of prayer books written by Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Cantebury.

[7] Jonathan North, England’s Boy King. (Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom: Ravenhall Books 2005)

[8] Thomas Seymour after his wife Catherine Parr died, Thomas attempted to marry Princess Elizabeth.

[9] Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII. (New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996)

[10] Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII.(New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996)

[11] Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII. (New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996)

[12] D.M. Loades, The Reign of Mary Tudor: Politics, Government, and Religion in England 1553-1558. ( New York: St. Martin’s Press 1979)

[13] D.M. Loades, The Reign of Mary Tudor: Politics, Government, and Religion in England 1553-1558. ( New York: St. Martin’s Press 1979)

[14] D.M. Loades, The Reign of Mary Tudor: Politics, Government, and Religion in England 1553-1558. ( New York: St. Martin’s Press 1979)

[15] The Marian Persecutions refers to the persecutions of Religious Reformers, Protestants, and other dissenters for their beliefs during the reign of Mary I of England

[16] Thomas Wyatt led Wyatt’s Rebellion that Elizabeth was said to be a part of, after being interrogated she was found to have no real part in the rebellions.

[17] D.M. Loades, The Reign of Mary Tudor: Politics, Government, and Religion in England 1553-1558. ( New York: St. Martin’s Press 1979)

[18] Lacey Baldwin Smith, This Realm of England 1399-1688. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company 2001)

[19] Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII. (New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996)

[20]Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII. (New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996)

[21] Alison Weir, The Children of Henry VIII. (New York, New York: Ballantine Books 1996).