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)