What Blood Won't Tell brings us at long last a brilliant analysis of the changing meanings of race in American law from the colonial era to the present. It will be indispensable for any informed discussions of a subject that lies at the very core of both American history and identity.

This exquisite inquiry into the complex and shifting ways in which the 'black-white' divide has been marked over the last three centuries excavates the deep roots of racial identification.

Through a close reading of racial identity trials in America, this book offers an eloquent contribution to ongoing debates over affirmative action, identity politics and the construction of a "colorblind" society. Historian Gross argues that racial identity trials--court cases in which outcomes turned on determining a person's "race" and their concomitant rights and privileges--provides an excellent basis for viewing the construction of "whiteness" and assessing the volatile category of race in American society. The author rigorously examines select cases including the outcomes of suits for freedom by onetime slaves like Abby Guy, who in 1857 convinced an all-white male jury that she was white and thus deserving of freedom. Upsetting the familiar notion of the "one-drop rule" in determining racial identity, Gross shows that in such cases the notion of what constituted race was itself as much in play as whether a particular individual could be identified (through some unstable combination of expert and "common sense" opinion) as one race or another. The social "performance" of identity is key, and enduringly so, as Gross periodically underscores by reference to various modern debates and trends.

Gross' book, a history of cases in which people have challenged their official racial designation, eloquently demonstrates just how difficult it can be to say what race--mine, yours, anybody's--actually consists of...What Blood Won't Tell is largely a catalog of delusions and the strategies by which Americans tried to prop up those delusions in courts of law...The very fact that some people with African "blood" (not a biologically valid concept, but a common term, then and now) could pass themselves off as white betrayed the reality; blacks, whites and Indians had been marrying, having sex and producing mixed-race children from the very beginning...A book like What Blood Won't Tell--which is, after all, a history, not a prescription--may not offer much that's usable as a guide to the future. But it does provide us with plenty of evidence of how badly we can and have screwed up, and how much imagination and determination it will take to do it better.

Argues forcefully that, for all the progress our public life has made toward the formal semblance of racial equality, the history and legal armature of white racism are much more stubborn, institutionalized features of our common life than a single presidential election, no matter how groundbreaking, can wipe away...Gross maps, through countless twists and turns, the extraordinary legal fictions enlisted to keep the formal workings of racial privilege on track. [The book] serves as a bracing reminder that "postracial politics," however captivating it may be as a catchphrase, is very nearly an oxymoron in American life.

Challenging the presumption of many scholars of the dominance of the "one-drop" rule in conferring black status, Gross argues that despite the rule, in court and by custom, racial boundaries were much more fluid and flexible--yet, primarily in the service of white supremacy...Gross also reflects on how this history of race determination fits into current efforts at a "color-blind" approach that ignores the significance of race in American culture.

What Blood Won't Tell chronicles the history of efforts to determine racial identity in the courts. Seldom, if ever, does science enter into the effort; rather, attorneys and others turn their attention to the evidence of skin color, social behavior, cultural customs, and other subjective and changeable evidence. The only thing that remains constant is the underlying assumption that white equals "full social and political citizenship" while anything else is inferior, less-than, and undeserving of Constitutional protection...The overriding opinion was that it's best to be white, but if you can't manage that, just don't be black. This shameful and ignorant American caste system is still as deeply entrenched in the nation's consciousness as ever, it seems...What Blood Won't Tell turns out to be a riveting overview of legal decisions regarding race and freedoms and a dizzying look at the insanity of social hierarchy and its ongoing impact on social development.

Gross [has written] an amazing book that addresses the relationship between race and citizenship in the U.S. Gross's presentation is both detailed and complex. The first half is devoted to establishing the role race and racism have played within the history and law of the U.S., as well as further developing the rich literature within whiteness scholarship. The strength of her argument lies in her ability to inject specific examples, oftentimes cases from the 19th century, into her whiteness discussions. The second half is equally impressive. Here Gross utilizes critical race theory to discuss black Indian identity, race in Hawaii, and other contemporary issues. This book is innovative, accessible, and valuable for undergraduates, graduates, and laypeople interested in a deep conversation on race and history.