The sit-ins of 1940-1965 were the first big non-violent protest that shook our nation. These were replicated during a time of turbulence and social unrest….so where are the sit-ins of 2025?

The reason the sit-ins worked was due to a creative legal loophole. The loophole being these ‘public spaces’ the lunch counters provided. These restaurants were in malls and food courts that way people saw those who were protesting. The law said the owners couldn’t tell them not to sit there, but the owners also didn’t want to serve the protesters. This created a standoff with the protesters and the owners of the restaurants. People passing by wouldn’t have the same information they did, and they may just see it as owners attacking patrons. This was also before loitering laws and ‘third places’ that got taken away.

Something to note in this situation as well is that the owners did not want this hitting the media. They lied to newspapers and news sources, to hide what was going on in their restaurants. They said these sit-ins were under control and not as frequent. They did not want people walking by and seeing this strike.

How did this move from multiple states then? De-Centralized Mass Protest was the best way to send a message. We see this in the General Strike USA that is gaining traction now. At their prime, the sit-ins spread from Virginia to South Carolina. The media coverage brought attention, but they also had churches and colleges. They used college campuses and churches to pass along messages to other groups.

These sit-ins elevated women in the movement by giving them leadership roles. These protesters saw going to jail as a sign of rebellion. They used to fill jails and truly attempt to overwork the system. This was replicated recently with the “Deportation Tipline” that Trump and his cabinet set up. Multitudes of people called in reporting Elon. Getting arrested served a double purpose, as this would put them in the jails to talk to their people. They deemed this as a “jail, no bail protest” even though the NAACP had funds to be able to bail them out. This was done because it was going to make the courts decide on the law. They would either have to force the restaurant owners to serve them, or tell the protesters they couldn't be there. 

The protesters were attempting to invoke “economic pressures and civic sense of responsibility… [so it]would quite likely be a better settlement than one hammered out through litigation in already over-burned courts” . Change happening within your fellow man is more likely than a corporation changing their minds and their private interest.

King endorsed and encouraged them to continue their movement. While looking back this was a historic act, at the time not a lot of people liked King. Many people did not agree with his rhetoric or ideology.