Plessy v. Ferguson
163 U.S. 537 (1896)
Constitutional Topic Areas:
Article IV Clause 2 ‘Supremacy Clause’, 8th Amendment, 13th Amendment, 14th Amendment, Appellate Jurisdiction, Police Powers, Federalism
Case Facts:
In 1890 the Louisiana State Legislature passed the Separate Car Act, which required “separate” train cars for both black and white passengers. In 1892 Homer Plessy, a mixed-race black and white creole man, collaborated with the civil rights group Comité des Citoynes and deliberately boarded a whites only car to challenge the law. Plessy was subsequently arrested and charged with violating the law and faced a $25 fine or 25 days in prison. In court, he argued the law was unconstitutional because it violated his 13th and 14th Amendment equal protection rights. The State of Louisiana disagreed and ruled against Plessy, arguing the Louisiana had the rights to regulate railroad companies operating within the state. Plessy petitioned the Louisiana Supreme Court on a writ of prohibition to stop the criminal trial from proceeding, which the court granted temporarily while it reviewed Plessy’s case, but eventually upheld the original ruling and denied a retrial. The state appeal again ruled against Plessy on the basis that the law did not violate his 14th Amendment rights according to numerous precedents from all over the US. Plessy appealed to the Supreme Court.
Questions:
1. Does Louisiana’s ‘separate but equal’ law violate the 13th Amendment?
2. Does the law violate the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause?
Holding:
1. No
2. No
Legal Reasoning: Justice H.B. Brown (7-1)
1. The 13th Amendment only guarantees black Americans a very basic level of equality only necessary to abolish slavery and nothing more. Therefore, The Separate Car Act of 1890 does not violate the 13th Amendment because Plessy is afforded an equal train car.
2. Even though the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause undoubtedly establishes the legal basis for the equality of all races, it does not prevent the societal discrimination against a particular race. Furthermore, the court echoed the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s 1849 ruling affirming segregation–“This prejudice, if it exists, is not created by law, and probably cannot be changed by law.”
3. Deference is extended to state’s Police Powers, or their ability to pass legislation regulating health, safety, and morals, and to determine the reasonableness of these laws. According to the law, black people were not inherently inferior, as they had their own segregated and ‘equal’ train car.
Dissent: Justice J.M. Harlan
1. It is without a doubt that the Separate Car Act of 1890 wasn’t meant to exclude whites from ‘black only’ cars, but for blacks to be excluded from ‘whites only’ cars. The law makes it look like there is equal representation because the blacks have their own car, but them being forbidden to enter the ‘whites only’ cars inherently implies they have lesser civil rights
2. Even though many whites view themselves as superior to blacks, the Constitution is colorblind and does not respect the classes of individuals and their color of skin. Therefore, everyone is afforded the same equality
3. Blacks are allowed to enter ‘whites only’ cars only when accompanying white children, such as when they are nannying or otherwise caring for them. This shows there is already some capacity for blacks to be allowed on ‘white only’ cars
4. The Separate Car Act of 1890 is unconstitutional because it violates Plessy’s 14th Amendment equal protection rights
5. Plessywill eventually be overturned and will be as infamous as Dred Scott
Significance:
Upon losing the case, Homer Plessy opted for the $25 fine rather than spend 20 days in jail. Plessy continued the Supreme Court’s trend of ruling against the rights of black individuals. This ruling affirmed laws requiring racial segregation all over the US–even in ‘free’ states though the ‘separate but equal’ doctrine. Even though the equality demanded by the 14th Amendment required equal facilities for both races, many ‘black only’ facilities were severely dilapidated, dirty, and potentially hazardous, which is clearly not equal. After Plessy,states would go on to disenfranchise many blacks, as well as poor whites through further extensions of segregation, such as poll taxes, bogus literacy tests, and purging voter rolls
Reflection:
The 7-1 vote in Plessy is implicitly strong, which is characterized by the fact that it wasn’t overturned over 50 years later in 1954 by the famous Brown v. Board of Education. As predicted by Justice Harlan in his dissent, this case did indeed become as infamous as Dred Scott–it remains a landmark for when the Supreme Court did not view blacks as inherently equal to whites. Overall, Plessy weakened the power of the federal government
Supreme Court Case Briefs 