The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States, signed into law on 2 July 1964 by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in employment, public accommodations, federally assisted programs, and other domains. It is widely regarded as one of the most consequential pieces of domestic legislation in American history, fundamentally altering the legal relationship between the federal government, private actors, and individual civil rights.

The Act emerged from decades of organized civil rights activism and the political crisis precipitated by high-profile resistance to desegregation in the South. President John F. Kennedy introduced the legislation in June 1963; following his assassination, Johnson pressed Congress to pass it as a memorial to Kennedy and a fulfillment of longstanding civil rights demands. The bill faced a filibuster lasting approximately 60 days in the Senate - the longest in Senate history at the time - before passing with bipartisan support. For a fuller account, see Civil Rights Act of 1964 - History.

The Act is organized into eleven titles, each addressing a distinct domain. Not all titles are summarized here.

• Title I prohibits unequal application of voter registration requirements.
• Title II bars discrimination in public accommodations (hotels, restaurants, theaters, and similar establishments) engaged in interstate commerce.
• Title III and Title IV address desegregation of public facilities and public education.
• Title VI prohibits discrimination in programs receiving federal financial assistance.
• Title VII prohibits employment discrimination by employers, labor unions, and employment agencies, and established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to enforce its provisions.

Subsequent legislation, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Fair Housing Act of 1968, extended civil rights protections into areas the 1964 Act did not fully address.

While the Act's core prohibitions are not seriously contested, a number of questions arising from its interpretation and application remain active areas of legal and political dispute.

The scope of Title VII has been repeatedly litigated. In Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII's prohibition on sex discrimination encompasses discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. This ruling is accepted by some as a straightforward textual interpretation and criticized by others as a departure from the original meaning of “sex” as understood in 1964. See Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Bostock Debate.

The relationship between anti-discrimination law and religious liberty has produced sustained legal conflict, particularly where business owners assert a conscience-based objection to serving certain customers or participating in certain events. See Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Religious Liberty Debate.

Title II's application to private businesses - and the constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause used to justify it - was contested at the time of passage and has been revisited periodically in legal and philosophical literature. See Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Public Accommodations Viewpoint.

The Act's relationship to affirmative action and group-based remedies is contested. Some interpret Title VII as prohibiting any classification by race in employment; others argue remedial race-conscious policies are consistent with or required by the Act's purposes. See Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Affirmative Action Debate.

There is broad legal and historical consensus that the Act is constitutionally valid under the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment, as affirmed in Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964) and Katzenbach v. McClung (1964). Historians broadly agree the Act substantially altered employment and public accommodation practices in the United States, though the relative weight of legal versus economic and social causes of change is debated. See Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Historical Consensus and Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Legal Consensus.

• Integrationist Viewpoint-viewpoint - The Act was a necessary and justified use of federal power to dismantle a system of state-enforced and socially entrenched racial hierarchy that individual action could not have overcome.
• Libertarian / Voluntary Association Viewpoint-viewpoint - Provisions compelling private businesses to serve all customers represent an infringement on freedom of association and contract, even when the goal is laudable.
• Originalist / Textualist Viewpoint-viewpoint - The Act should be interpreted according to the public meaning of its terms at the time of enactment, which constrains expansive readings such as those in Bostock.
• Substantive Equality Viewpoint-viewpoint - Formal non-discrimination is insufficient; the Act's purposes require active remediation of historical disadvantage, including race-conscious policies.
• Religious Exemption Viewpoint-viewpoint - Anti-discrimination mandates must be balanced against First Amendment free exercise rights, particularly for individuals and organizations with sincere religious objections.

• Civil Rights Act of 1964 - History
• Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Debate
• Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Affirmative Action Debate
• Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Religious Liberty Debate
• Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Bostock Debate
• Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Historical Consensus
• Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Legal Consensus
• Fourteenth Amendment
• Voting Rights Act of 1965
• Fair Housing Act of 1968
• Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
• Affirmative Action

1. Civil Rights Act of 1964, Pub. L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241 (2 July 1964).
2. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964).
3. Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964).
4. Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020).
5. Robert D. Loevy, The Civil Rights Act of 1964: The Passage of the Law That Ended Racial Segregation (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997).
6. Charles & Barbara Whalen, The Longest Debate: A Legislative History of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Cabin John, MD: Seven Locks Press, 1985).