How did Andrew Johnson's Reconstruction policy differ from Lincoln's, and what was its stance on rights for freedpeople?

• A. It kept Lincoln's plan intact with only minor changes.
• B. It extended full civil rights and federal protections to freedpeople, more than Lincoln proposed.
• C. It favored rapid restoration with leniency toward Southerners and opposed robust federal protections for freedpeople, vetoing civil rights legislation.
• D. It dissolved the federal government in the South.

Answer: (C)

The main idea is how presidential Reconstruction differed in how much the federal government would shield newly freed people versus how quickly Southern states would be readmitted. Lincoln’s approach was a moderate, relatively rapid path to reintegration that accepted emancipation and required allegiance from Southern whites, but it did not push for sweeping federal guarantees for freedpeople. Johnson’s approach flipped toward rapid restoration with broad leniency for former Confederates and limited federal protection for freedpeople, opposing strong national civil rights measures. He vetoed major civil rights legislation and believed that guaranteed rights should be decided by the states, not by federal power, which allowed Black Codes and other restrictions to take hold in the South. This contrast helps explain why Johnson’s plan differed so sharply from Lincoln’s and why many protections for freedpeople came only after Congress stepped in.