He Won Equal Protections for All. San Francisco Residents Want to Tell His Story | KQED

"Though Chinese immigrants were initially welcomed during the Gold Rush, they eventually became reviled as their population numbers grew, and their roles in the industrial workforce expanded. In addition to working as miners and railroad laborers, Chinese immigrants quickly met a demand that others were not eager to fill: laundry service. They eventually dominated the industry throughout the rest of the 19th century - much to the dismay of city residents and leaders."

"Discriminatory city ordinances were often passed to make operating businesses, like laundries, difficult for Chinese immigrants. One notorious law in particular was passed in 1880, which required permits for wooden laundries. It was a move that targeted most Chinese-owned businesses; though they met other regulations, almost every Chinese laundry owner was denied a permit, while white owners were approved."

"In an extraordinary act of defiance, Yick, the laundry's owner, continued operating his business anyway. He refused to pay the fine and was arrested. He and another fellow Chinese laundryman, Wo Lee, sued the city. With the financial support of an influential community coalition called the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association, also known as the Chinese Six Companies, as well as other powerful groups in San Francisco Chinatown, they hired top white lawyers to fight their case."

"In a unanimous 1886 ruling in favor of the Chinese laundrymen, the court declared that even if a law appears to be race-neutral, "if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal hand" it violates constitutional protections."

Chinese immigrants in late-1800s San Francisco faced mob violence, destruction of property, and legal discrimination that limited their ability to earn a living. After initial Gold Rush welcome, growing Chinese populations and expanded industrial roles led to widespread resentment, including dominance in laundry services. City ordinances targeted Chinese-owned laundries, including an 1880 law requiring permits for wooden laundries. Most Chinese laundry owners were denied permits despite meeting other requirements, while white owners were approved. Yick, a laundry owner, continued operating without a permit, refused to pay a fine, and was arrested. He and Wo Lee sued the city with support from the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association and other Chinatown groups. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 1886 that unequal administration of a race-neutral law violates constitutional protections.

Read at Kqed