The landmark case of Plessy v. Ferguson of 1896 established the "separate but equal" doctrine within the United States. The facts of this case are clear-cut and are not as confusing as other monument Supreme Court cases. Homer Plessy was a black man who lived in the state of Louisiana. The state of Louisiana mandated that blacks and whites be given separate accommodations for train cars, one car for whites and another for blacks. Plessy was 1/8 black and had a light-skinned complexion but could not ride the white train car by law. In an act of civil disobedience, Plessy decided to purchase a ticket for whites and boarded the white car. He was subsequently arrested, and he appealed his case up to the highest court in the land.
Plessy appealed under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and made the basic claim that separate accommodations cannot be equal. The defense for Plessy made a few key arguments that are persuasive today but had little impact back in 1896. After all, the court ruled 7-1 against Plessy with one judge choosing not to participate in the ruling.
The first argument from Plessy's defense was that the "separate but equal" doctrine was a logical fallacy. By having two things that are separate, they are not inherently equal. This contention, although noteworthy, did not hold up, so the defense was forced to consider another line of argument. They settled on the "badge of inferiority" argument. This claimed that by forcing blacks to be separate, the group was subjected to a lower status. Furthermore, Plessy argued that bias and prejudice could not be used as the basis for law.
In response, the prosecution pursued many strong lines and counterarguments. The first was a simple fact about the 14th Amendment. The Amendment only applied to public institutions (government) not private institutions or businesses. Furthermore, Ferguson argued that the law was generally applicable meaning that it did not target blacks exclusively. Whites could not sit with blacks in the same way that blacks could not sit with whites. The final claim used by Ferguson was the "clean hands doctrine." This doctrine states that the defense cannot claim to be a victim if they knowingly broke the law. Plessy did knowingly sit in the incorrect train car, which made Ferguson’s case particularly strong even though it did not discuss the deeper question of segregation.
After hearing the arguments from both sides, the court ruled in favor of Ferguson and cemented "separate but equal" into law. This ruling further legitimized Jim Crow laws in the south and stalled the integration of American society for another 58 years! The decision of Plessy v. Ferguson was not overturned until 1954 with the case of Brown v. Board of Education.
If you want to learn more about Plessy v. Ferguson, please consider the links/sources below. Please keep in mind that many of the facts presented in this blog were presented in a mock trial I had for the case in class.
No comments:
Post a Comment