plessy v ferguson opinion

When the government, therefore, has secured to each of its citizens equal rights before the law and equal opportunities for improvement and progress, it has accomplished the end for which it was organized, and performed all of the functions respecting social advantages with which it is endowed. Explain. In Plessy v. Ferguson, the U.S. Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of an 1890 Louisiana law that required railway companies to provide equal, but separate accommodations for white and African American passengers either with separate cars or by dividing a car into two sections with a partition. 108 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<407DAA18AEB5EB48AD4DEA5F7CE5110F><3B5BBA0423E4F24C843C2EF9A51D3FBB>]/Index[80 54]/Info 79 0 R/Length 128/Prev 128692/Root 81 0 R/Size 134/Type/XRef/W[1 3 1]>>stream © 2020 Iowa Department of Cultural Affairs. Under the allegations of his petition, it may undoubtedly become a question of importance whether, under the laws of Louisiana, the petitioner belongs to the white or colored race.”, Then in dissent, Justice Harlan wrote, “I am of opinion that the statute of Louisiana is inconsistent with the personal liberty of citizens, white and black, in that State, and hostile to both the spirit and letter of the Constitution of the United States. The blacks and whites were obviously not treated equally, which completely violates the “separate but equal clase.” But in other cases such as the train one that resulted segregation on trains, would be unconstitutional, for Plessy, who was seven-eighths white, was not allowed to sit on the white side of the train. Majority Opinion, Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) The object of the [Fourteenth] amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political, equality, Then in opposition, Ferguson was represented by attorney Alexander Porter Morse. Under the Fourteenth Amendment, it says that everyone has “equal protection under the law.” So for example, if segregation were to be used properly, like it states in this case, then maybe it’d be considered constitutional. Acts 1890, No. African Americans in New Orleans fought the new law in several ways, including a legal challenge. Summarize Justice John M. Harlan's dissenting opinion in only one sentence. Plessy v. Ferguson MR. JUSTICE BROWN, after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court. If the two races are to meet upon terms of social equality, it must be the result of natural affinities, a mutual appreciation of each other’s merits, and a voluntary consent of individuals. In 1892, Homer Plessy, seven-eighths white, seated himself in the whites-only car and was arrested. In situations like schooling, if two different races were segregated to attend different schools, but the schools taught the exact same things and provided the same treatment for everyone, then under the Fourteenth Amendment, that would still be “equal protection under the law.” However, when segregation was implemented, that was not how things worked out. He argued that Louisiana's segregation law violated the 13th Amendment banning of slavery and the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. All rights reserved. I am of opinion that the statute of Louisiana is inconsistent with the personal liberty of citizens, white and black, in that State, and hostile to both the spirit and letter of … If this be so, it is not by reason of anything found in the act, but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it. h�b``�b``jb```��ƀ Plessy v. Ferguson: Justice Harlan Dissents. Overall, the idea of segregation and “separate but equal” may be constitutional, but because in the real world, racism would be inevitable no matter what situation you consider, the result would be unconstitutional. Plessy v. Ferguson Is Louisiana’s law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment? %PDF-1.6 %���� Plessy v. Ferguson . In this case, I think the “separate but equal” clause could work both ways, depending on how it is used. Decided May 18, 1896. "Plessy v. Ferguson Opinions," The Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Long Struggle for Freedom, CBS, 4 March 1956. We imagine that the white race, at least, would not acquiesce in this assumption. If laws of like character should be enacted in the several States of the Union, the effect would be in the highest degree mischievous. This case turns upon the constitutionality of an act of the General Assembly of the State of Louisiana, passed in 1890, providing for separate railway carriages for the white and colored races. �����YL In a 7-1 decision, the Supreme Court ruled against Plessy, arguing that although the 14th Amendment was created to provide equality before the law, it was not designed to create social equality. Can one exist without the other? Your email address will not be published. Slavery, as an institution tolerated by law would, it is true, have disappeared from our country, but there would remain a power in the States, by sinister legislation, to interfere with the full enjoyment of the blessings of freedom to regulate civil rights, common to all citizens, upon the basis of race, and to place in a condition of legal inferiority a large body of American citizens now constituting a part of the political community called the People of the United States, for whom and by whom, through representatives, our government is administered. The Supreme Court argued that the Constitution and legislation in general cannot create social equality. 111, p. … In 1890, Louisiana passed a law compelling railways to “provide equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored, races,” joining several southern states that had already passed similar laws. Plessy was represented by attorneys, A. W. Tourgee and Samuel Field Phillips. Such a system is inconsistent with the guarantee given by the Constitution to each State of a republican form of government, and may be stricken down by Congressional action, or by the courts in the discharge of their solemn duty to maintain the supreme law of the land, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”. Courtesy of Library of Congress, "Plessy v. Ferguson Opinions," The Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Long Struggle for Freedom, CBS, 4 March 1956. The Plessy v. Ferguson decision distinguished between political and social equality. There are just some cases where you cannot be “separate but equal” if you tried. The argument also assumes that social prejudices may be overcome by legislation, and that equal rights cannot be secured to the negro except by an enforced commingling of the two races. What's the difference between the two? We cannot accept this proposition. 210. Is Louisiana’s law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment? endstream endobj 81 0 obj <>/Metadata 2 0 R/Pages 78 0 R/StructTreeRoot 6 0 R/Type/Catalog>> endobj 82 0 obj <>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]/XObject<>>>/Rotate 0/StructParents 0/TrimBox[0.0 0.0 612.0 792.0]/Type/Page>> endobj 83 0 obj <>stream Why or why not? Courtesy of Library of Congress, "Plessy v. Ferguson Opinions," The Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Long Struggle for Freedom, CBS, 4 March 1956. Required fields are marked *, (c) 2016 SupremeOpinion.Com All rights reserved. If the civil and political rights of both races be equal, one cannot be inferior to the other civilly or politically. Revolution and the New Nation (1754-1820s), Development of the Industrial United States (1870-1900), Great Depression and World War II (1929-1945), Contemporary United States (1968 to the present), Cultural Leadership Partner Operating Support Grant, Plessy v. Ferguson Opinions, March 4, 1956. endstream endobj startxref The Supreme Court also quickly dismissed Plessy’s 13th Amendment claim, suggesting that the 1890 law was obviously not a version of slavery and the point was "too clear for argument." But these are questions to be determined under the laws of each State, and are not properly put in issue in this case. It is true that the question of the proportion of colored blood necessary to constitute a colored person, as distinguished from a white person, is one upon which there is a difference of opinion in the different States, some holding that any visible admixture of black blood stamps the person as belonging to the colored race (State v. Chaver, 5 Jones [N.C.] 1, p. 11); others that it depends upon the preponderance of blood (Gray v. State, 4 Ohio 354; Monroe v. Collins, 17 Ohio St. 665); and still others that the predominance of white blood must only be in the proportion of three-fourths. @� ��K ����$m��P��f�>��Tux����ʔN3��}��3O��A�A�cw �`Ƈ+ �&fa`����! Wisconsin v. Yoder: State Law or Religious Freedom (05/15/1972), New York Times v. Sullivan: Protection of False Statements (03/09/1964), DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, Bethel School District v. Fraser: Right to Lewd Speeches (07/07/1986), Roper v. Simmons: Minor Execution (03/01/2005). Courtesy of Library of Congress. Do you agree? The argument necessarily assumes that if, as has been more than once the case and is not unlikely to be so again, the colored race should become the dominant power in the state legislature, and should enact a law in precisely similar terms, it would thereby relegate the white race to an inferior position. As long as separate facilities were equal, they did not violate the 14th Amendment. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) Plessy v. Ferguson. h��Xio�F�+��E�r���ݸu�È�&@����Beɐ ����H��DJvڀ�����R����Fg��1Z倇Q&�Vy��t�F���X�P e�2�Ȣ����&e�C����. 0 Description. Plessy, who was one-eighth Black, was working with an advocacy group intent on testing the law for the purpose of bringing a court case. The Supreme Court rejected Plessy's assertion that the law left African Americans "with a badge of inferiority" and argued that if this were the case, it was because the race put it upon itself. In fact, the Supreme Court argued, it would be impossible to eliminate racial prejudice because the beliefs of society could not be changed simply through changes in law. Argued April 18, 1896. On June 7, 1892 a New Orleans shoemaker, Homer Plessy, bought a railroad ticket and sat in a car designated for whites only. Justices Majority: Melville Fuller, Stephen Field, Horace Gray, Henry Brown, George Shiras, Edward White, Rufus Peckham, This case held that racial segregation between the whites and the black were considered constitutional as long as they were “separate but equal.”. As was said by the Court of Appeals of New York in People v. Gallagher: this end can neither be accomplished nor promoted by laws which conflict with the general sentiment of the community upon whom they are designed to operate. Justice John Marshall Harlan, the lone dissenter just as he was in the Civil Rights Cases, wrote an opinion that would eventually become the standard approach to segregation by the Supreme Court beginning with the Brown v. Board of Education case.