De jure refers to policies established by law, while de facto refers to practices that are commonly accepted. Discrimination can exist despite de jure laws, and changing laws alone may not change cultural values. De jure government is legal and with consent, while de facto is by force. De jure segregation is legal segregation, as in the “separate but equal” laws in the US.
The phrase “de jure” means “in law” in Latin. It refers to a policy or standard that has been established by law, as opposed to something that is “de facto” or “in fact”. These two terms are often found in use together, with people drawing the line between commonly accepted practices and practices that are actually legally approved.
There are a number of contexts where people might describe something as de jure. For example, in American history, women were not granted the right to vote until 1920, when the 19th amendment, which allows women to vote legally, was ratified. However, many women were denied the right to vote through de facto politics much later in communities where people disagreed with the suffragist movement.
The contrast between de facto practice and de jure practice often emerges when it comes to discrimination. Many nations have clear de jure laws on the books that are intended to curb discrimination against ethnic minorities, women, and people of unconventional sexual orientation. However, in some of these cases, the factual practices continue to promote discrimination despite the clear legal mandate. Due to legal attempts to eliminate discrimination, proving factual discrimination can actually get quite complicated, because people and organizations that practice discrimination are careful to hide their activities.
Some people feel that a de jure mandate is often not enough, because changing the law will not change ingrained cultural values. Others believe that establishing something in a court of law or through legislation is crucial, because it can be used as a basis for changing society’s views on an issue. For example, interracial marriage was once viewed as outrageously deviant, until laws prohibiting it were scrapped, after which it became quite common in many societies. Enforcing a de jure mandate is also crucial, as legal mandates are useless unless people act on them. For example, arguing that all citizens should be treated equally is effective only when victims of unequal treatment sue.
Some other uses of the term include “de jure government” to refer to a government that rules legally and with the consent of the people, as opposed to a de facto government, which takes control of a country by force. De jure segregation is segregation sanctioned by law, as in the infamous “separate but equal” laws that allowed segregation in the United States to legally persist until the 1960s.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
