DOCSLIB.ORG

Plessy V. Ferguson (1896)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Plessy V. Ferguson (1896) Plessy v. Ferguson 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, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to either." —Justice Henry Billings Brown, speaking for the majority TABLE OF CONTENTS Resources Activities 2 About landmarkcases.org The Case 3 Teaching Recommendations Reinforcing the Case Facts with a Based on Your Time Cartoon (online only) 4 Background Summary and Questions 19 Does Treating People Equally Mean Treating Them the Same? • • • Reading Level • • Reading Level 21 Fourteenth Amendment v. • Reading Level Tenth Amendment: Federalism 12 Diagram of How the Case Moved Through the Court System 23 Interpreting the Constitution 14 Key Excerpts from the Majority After The Case Opinion 26 The Impact of the Case: Separate But Equal 17 Key Excerpts from the Dissenting Opinion 27 How a Dissent Can Presage a Ruling Full Text of the Majority Opinion (online Case Study on Integration - Little only) Rock (online only) © 2000 Street Law, Inc. and the Supreme Court Historical Society 1 Visit www.landmarkcases.org Plessy v. Ferguson About landmarkcases.org This site was developed to provide teachers with a full range of resources and activities to support the teaching of landmark Supreme Court cases, helping students explore the key issues of each case. The "Resources" section features basic building blocks such as background summaries and excerpts of opinions that can be used in multiple ways. The "Activities" section contains a range of short activities and in-depth lessons that can be completed with students. While these activities are online, many of them can be adapted for use in a one-computer classroom or a classroom with no computer. Depending upon the amount of time you have to teach the case, you may want to use one or more of the "Resources" or "Activities" in conjunction with one or more of the general teaching strategies. These general teaching strategies include moot court activities, political cartoon analysis, continuum exercises, and Web site evaluation. If you have time constraints, look at the Teaching Recommendations on page 3. Feel free to experiment with these materials! © 2000 Street Law, Inc. and the Supreme Court Historical Society 2 Visit www.landmarkcases.org Plessy v. Ferguson Teaching Recommendations Based on Your Time If you have one day . • Begin with the activity titled "Does Treating People Equally Mean Treating Them the Same?" Discuss situations where equal treatment requires the same treatment and where equal treatment requires different treatment. • Read the background summary as a class. Have students identify the relevant facts in the case, using the questions as a guide. • For homework, have students read the excerpt from the majority opinion and answer the accompanying questions. If you have two days . • Complete all activities for the first day. • On the second day, complete the activity titled "Fourteenth Amendment v. Tenth Amendment: Federalism." • In class or for homework, have students read the excerpt from the majority opinion and answer the accompanying questions. If you have three days . • Complete all activities for the first and second days. • On the third day, clarify students' understanding of the majority opinion. Read the dissenting opinion as a class and identify differences in reasoning between them. • Complete the activity titled "How a Dissent Can Presage a Ruling." • For homework, if students have access to computers and the Internet, have them investigate the "Case Study on Integration - Little Rock." If you have four days . • Complete all the activities for the first, second, and third days. • On the fourth day, depending on your students' level, complete the activity "Interpreting the Constitution." • If the activity "Interpreting the Constitution" is not grade-level appropriate, have students complete the online activity "Case Study on Integration - Little Rock." © 2000 Street Law, Inc. and the Supreme Court Historical Society 3 Visit www.landmarkcases.org Plessy v. Ferguson Background Summary and Questions • • • In 1890, Louisiana passed a statute called the "Separate Car Act", which stated "that all railway companies carrying passengers in their coaches in this state, shall provide equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored races, by providing two or more passenger coaches for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger coaches by a partition so as to secure separate accommodations. " The penalty for sitting in the wrong compartment was a fine of $25 or 20 days in jail. The Plessy case was carefully orchestrated by both the Citizens' Committee to Test the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Act, a group of blacks who raised $3000 to challenge the Act, and the East Louisiana Railroad Company, which sought to terminate the Act largely for monetary reasons. They chose a 30- year-old shoemaker named Homer Plessy, a citizen of the United States who was one-eighth black and a resident of the state of Louisiana. On June 7, 1892, Plessy purchased a first-class passage from New Orleans to Covington, Louisiana and sat in the railroad car designated for whites only. The railroad officials, following through on the arrangement, arrested Plessy and charged him with violating the Separate Car Act. Well known advocate for black rights Albion Tourgee, a white lawyer, agreed to argue the case without compensation. In the criminal district court for the parish of Orleans, Plessy argued that the Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. Thirteenth Amendment Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Fourteenth Amendment Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. John Howard Ferguson was the judge presiding over Plessy's criminal case in the district court. He had previously declared the Separate Car Act "unconstitutional on trains that traveled through several states." However, in Plessy's case he decided that the state could choose to regulate railroad companies that © 2000 Street Law, Inc. and the Supreme Court Historical Society 4 Visit www.landmarkcases.org Plessy v. Ferguson operated solely within the state of Louisiana. Therefore, Ferguson found Plessy guilty and declared the Separate Car Act constitutional. Plessy appealed the case to the Louisiana State Supreme Court, which affirmed the decision that the Louisiana law as constitutional. Plessy petitioned for a writ of error from the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge John Howard Ferguson was named in the case brought before the United States Supreme Court (Plessy v. Ferguson) because he had been named in the petition to the Louisiana Supreme Court and not because he was a party to the initial lawsuit. © 2000 Street Law, Inc. and the Supreme Court Historical Society 5 Visit www.landmarkcases.org Plessy v. Ferguson Background Summary and Questions • • • Questions to Consider: 1. What law did Homer Plessy violate? How did Plessy violate this law? 2. What rights do the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution provide? 3. If you were Plessy's lawyer, how would you justify your claim that the "Separate Car Act" violates the Thirteenth and Fourteenth amendments? 4. In State of Louisiana v. Plessy, Judge Ferguson decided that the state could choose to regulate railroad companies that operated within the state even though he had previously declared the "Separate Car Act" unconstitutional on trains that traveled through several states. If an act is declared unconstitutional in one case, shouldn't it be held unconstitutional in all cases? How do you think Judge Ferguson could legally justify making this distinction? 5. Is it possible for two races to remain separated while striving for equality? Are separation and equality compatible? Why or why not? 6. Can you think of an example or situation where separation does not mean inequality? © 2000 Street Law, Inc. and the Supreme Court Historical Society 6 Visit www.landmarkcases.org Plessy v. Ferguson Background Summary and Questions • • In 1890, Louisiana passed a statute called the "Separate Car Act". This law declared that all rail companies carrying passengers in Louisiana had to provide separate but equal accommodations for white and non-white passengers. The penalty for sitting in the wrong compartment was a fine of $25 or 20 days in jail. Two parties wanted to challenge the constitutionality of the Separate Car Act. A group of black citizens who raised money to overturn the law worked together with the East Louisiana Railroad Company, which sought to terminate the Act largely for monetary reasons. They chose a 30-year-old shoemaker named Homer Plessy, a citizen of the United States who was one-eighth black and a resident of the state of Louisiana. On June 7, 1892, Plessy purchased a first-class passage from New Orleans to Covington, Louisiana and sat in the railroad car for "White" passengers. The railroad officials knew Plessy was coming and arrested him for violating the Separate Car Act. Well known advocate for black rights Albion Tourgee, a white lawyer, agreed to argue the case for free. Plessy argued in court that the Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • We As Freemen
    WE AS FREEMEN WE AS FREEMEN Plessy v. Ferguson By Keith Weldon Medley PELICAN PUBLISHING COMPANY Gretna 2003 Copyright © 2003 By Keith Weldon Medley All rights reserved The word “Pelican” and the depiction of a pelican are trademarks of Pelican Publishing Company, Inc., and are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Medley, Keith Weldon. We as freemen : Plessy v. Ferguson and legal segregation / by Keith Weldon Medley. p. cm. Includes index. ISBN 1-58980-120-2 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Plessy, Homer Adolph—Trials, litigation, etc. 2. Segregation in transportation—Law and legislation—Louisiana—History. 3. Segregation—Law and legislation—United States—History. 4. United States—Race relations—History. I. Title: Plessy v. Ferguson. II. Title. KF223.P56 M43 2003 342.73’0873—dc21 2002154505 Printed in the United States of America Published by Pelican Publishing Company, Inc. 1000 Burmaster Street, Gretna, Louisiana 70053 In memory of my parents, Alfred Andrew Medley, Sr., and Veronica Rose Toca Medley For my sons, Keith and Kwesi “We, as freemen, still believe that we were right and our cause is sacred.” —Statement of the Comité des Citoyens, 1896 Contents Acknowledgments 0 Chapter 1 A Negro Named Plessy 000 Chapter 2 John Howard Ferguson 000 Chapter 3 Albion W. Tourgee 000 Chapter 4 One Country, One People 000 Chapter 5 The Separate Car Act of 1890 000 Chapter 6 Who Will Bell the Cat? 000 Chapter 7 Are You a Colored Man? 000 Chapter 8 My Dear Martinet 000 Chapter 9 We as Freemen 000 Chapter 10 The Battle of Freedom 000 Appendix A: Further Reading 000 Notes 000 Index 000 Acknowledgments I would like to thank Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Than Segregation, Racial Identity: the Neglected Question in Plessy V
    Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice Volume 10 | Issue 1 Article 3 Spring 4-1-2004 MORE THAN SEGREGATION, RACIAL IDENTITY: THE NEGLECTED QUESTION IN PLESSY V. FERGUSON Thomas J. Davis Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/crsj Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Thomas J. Davis, MORE THAN SEGREGATION, RACIAL IDENTITY: THE NEGLECTED QUESTION IN PLESSY V. FERGUSON, 10 Wash. & Lee Race & Ethnic Anc. L. J. 1 (2004). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/crsj/vol10/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MORE THAN SEGREGATION, RACIAL IDENTITY: THE NEGLECTED QUESTION IN PLESSY V. FERGUSON Thomas J. Davis* I. INTRODUCTION The U.S. Supreme Court's 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson' has long stood as an ignominious marker in U.S. law, symbolizing the nation's highest legal sanction for the physical separation by race of persons in the United States. In ruling against thirty-four-year-old New Orleans shoemaker Homer Adolph Plessy's challenge to Louisiana's Separate Railway Act of 1890,2 the Court majority declared that we think the enforced separation of the races, as applied to the internal commerce of the state, neither abridges the privileges or immunities of the colored man, deprives him of his property without due process of law, nor denies him the equal protection of the laws, within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.3 One commentator on the Court's treatment of African-American civil rights cast the Plessy decision as "the climactic Supreme Court pronouncement on segregated institutions."4 Historian C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freedom Rides of 1961
    The Freedom Rides of 1961 “If history were a neighborhood, slavery would be around the corner and the Freedom Rides would be on your doorstep.” ~ Mike Wiley, writer & director of “The Parchman Hour” Overview Throughout 1961, more than 400 engaged Americans rode south together on the “Freedom Rides.” Young and old, male and female, interracial, and from all over the nation, these peaceful activists risked their lives to challenge segregation laws that were being illegally enforced in public transportation throughout the South. In this lesson, students will learn about this critical period of history, studying the 1961 events within the context of the entire Civil Rights Movement. Through a PowerPoint presentation, deep discussion, examination of primary sources, and watching PBS’s documentary, “The Freedom Riders,” students will gain an understanding of the role of citizens in shaping our nation’s democracy. In culmination, students will work on teams to design a Youth Summit that teaches people their age about the Freedom Rides, as well as inspires them to be active, engaged community members today. Grade High School Essential Questions • Who were the key players in the Freedom Rides and how would you describe their actions? • Why do you think the Freedom Rides attracted so many young college students to participate? • What were volunteers risking by participating in the Freedom Rides? • Why did the Freedom Rides employ nonviolent direct action? • What role did the media play in the Freedom Rides? How does media shape our understanding
    [Show full text]
  • Rhythm, Dance, and Resistance in the New Orleans Second Line
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles “We Made It Through That Water”: Rhythm, Dance, and Resistance in the New Orleans Second Line A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Ethnomusicology by Benjamin Grant Doleac 2018 © Copyright by Benjamin Grant Doleac 2018 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION “We Made It Through That Water”: Rhythm, Dance, and Resistance in the New Orleans Second Line by Benjamin Grant Doleac Doctor of Philosophy in Ethnomusicology University of California, Los Angeles, 2018 Professor Cheryl L. Keyes, Chair The black brass band parade known as the second line has been a staple of New Orleans culture for nearly 150 years. Through more than a century of social, political and demographic upheaval, the second line has persisted as an institution in the city’s black community, with its swinging march beats and emphasis on collective improvisation eventually giving rise to jazz, funk, and a multitude of other popular genres both locally and around the world. More than any other local custom, the second line served as a crucible in which the participatory, syncretic character of black music in New Orleans took shape. While the beat of the second line reverberates far beyond the city limits today, the neighborhoods that provide the parade’s sustenance face grave challenges to their existence. Ten years after Hurricane Katrina tore up the economic and cultural fabric of New Orleans, these largely poor communities are plagued on one side by underfunded schools and internecine violence, and on the other by the rising tide of post-disaster gentrification and the redlining-in- disguise of neoliberal urban policy.
    [Show full text]
  • From Street Law Inc. and Supreme Court Historical Society on Plessy V
    From Street Law Inc. and Supreme Court Historical Society on Plessy v. Ferguson Background In 1890, Louisiana passed a statute called the Separate Car Act, which stated "that all railway companies carrying passengers in their coaches in this state, shall provide equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored races, by providing two or more passenger coaches for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger coaches by a partition so as to secure separate accommodations. " The penalty for sitting in the wrong compartment was a fine of $25 or 20 days in jail. The Plessy case was carefully orchestrated by both the Citizens' Committee to Test the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Act, a group of blacks who raised $3000 to challenge the Act, and the East Louisiana Railroad Company, which sought to terminate the Act largely for monetary reasons. They chose a 30-year- old shoemaker named Homer Plessy, a citizen of the United States who was one-eighth black and a resident of the state of Louisiana. On June 7, 1892, Plessy purchased a first-class passage from New Orleans to Covington, Louisiana and sat in the railroad car designated for whites only. The railroad officials, following through on the arrangement, arrested Plessy and charged him with violating the Separate Car Act. Well known advocate for black rights Albion Tourgee, a white lawyer, agreed to argue the case without compensation. In the criminal district court for the parish of Orleans, Plessy argued that the Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Orleans Free People of Color and the Process of Americanization, 1803-1896
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2005 The New Orleans Free People of Color and the Process of Americanization, 1803-1896 Camille Kempf Gourdet College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the African American Studies Commons, African History Commons, and the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Gourdet, Camille Kempf, "The New Orleans Free People of Color and the Process of Americanization, 1803-1896" (2005). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626484. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-wf20-pk69 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE NEW ORLEANS FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR AND THE PROCESS OF AMERICANIZATION, 1803-1896 A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Anthropology The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Camille K. Gourdet 2005 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Camille Kempf feourdet Approved by the Committee, May 2005 sor, Chair kii HhtC'QuL. $you2, Kathleen Bragdon, Professor UX-— M. Lynn Weiss, Professor ii To my husband Nico, who has always stood firmly by my side. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements vi Abstract vii Chapter I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emancipation Proclamation
    The Emancipation Proclamation Directions: The students will first watch two videos on the Emancipation Proclamation. The students will then read the two documents on the proclamation and answer the questions that follow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWrQ5VBZi2E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUVkXthLz4w President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation​ Proclamation ​on January 1, 1863, as the nation approached its third year of bloody civil war. The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free." Despite this expansive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the United States, leaving slavery untouched in the loyal border states. It also expressly exempted parts of the Confederacy (the Southern secessionist states) that had already come under Northern control. Most important, the freedom it promised depended upon Union (United States) military victory. Although the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery in the nation, it captured the hearts and imagination of millions of Americans and fundamentally transformed the character of the war. After January 1, 1863, every advance of federal troops expanded the domain of freedom. Moreover, the Proclamation announced the acceptance of black men into the Union Army and Navy, enabling the liberated to become liberators. By the end of the war, almost 200,000 black soldiers and sailors had fought for the Union and freedom. From the first days of the Civil War, slaves had acted to secure their own liberty. The Emancipation Proclamation confirmed their insistence that the war for the Union must become a war for freedom.
    [Show full text]
  • Plessy V. Ferguson (1896) BACKGROUND
    Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) BACKGROUND In 1890, Louisiana passed a statute called the "Separate Car Act", which stated "that all railway companies carrying passengers in their coaches in this state, shall provide equal but separate accommodations for the white, and colored races, by providing two or more passenger coaches for each passenger train, or by dividing the passenger coaches by a partition so as to secure separate accommodations. .. " The penalty for sitting in the wrong compartment was a fine of $25 or 20 days in jail. The Plessy case was carefully orchestrated by both the Citizens' Committee to Test the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Act, a group of blacks who raised $3000 to challenge the Act, and the East Louisiana Railroad Company, which sought to terminate the Act largely for monetary reasons. They chose a 30-year-old shoemaker named Homer Plessy, a citizen of the United States who was one-eighth black and a resident of the state of Louisiana. On June 7, 1892, Plessy purchased a first-class passage from New Orleans to Covington, Louisiana and sat in the railroad car designated for whites only. The railroad officials, following through on the arrangement, arrested Plessy and charged him with violating the Separate Car Act. Well known advocate for black rights Albion Tourgee, a white lawyer, agreed to argue the case without compensation. In the criminal district court for the parish of Orleans, Plessy argued that the Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. Thirteenth Amendment Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
    [Show full text]
  • We As Freemen Plessy V
    we02efm_PB ed-2015.qxp 6/4/2015 11:54 AM Page 1 we02efm_PB ed-2015.qxp 6/4/2015 11:54 AM Page 2 We as Freemen Plessy v. Ferguson By Keith Weldon Medley In 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson, Louisiana’s famous Supreme Court case, established the separate-but-equal doctrine that pre- vailed in America until the Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954. Homer Plessy’s arrest in a New Orleans railway car was not mere happenstance, but the result of a carefully choreographed campaign of civil disobedience planned by the Comité des Citoyens. This group of Republican free men of color had watched their rights disappear under the increasingly strict Jim Crow laws of the post-Reconstruction period. To contest these new restrictions, they arranged for Plessy, who could “pass” for white, to illegally seat himself in a whites-only carriage. Keith Weldon Medley brings to life the players in this landmark trial, from the crusading black columnist Rodolphe Des- dunes and the other members of the Comité des Citoyens to Albion W. Tourgee, the outspoken writer who repre- sented Plessy, to John Ferguson, a reformist carpetbagger who nonetheless found Plessy guilty. The U.S. Supreme Court sustained the finding, with only John Marshall Harlan, a Southern associ- ate justice, voting against the decision. we02efm_PB ed-2015.qxp 6/4/2015 11:54 AM Page 3 We as Freemen we02efm_PB ed-2015.qxp 6/4/2015 11:54 AM Page 4 we02efm_PB ed-2015.qxp 6/4/2015 11:54 AM Page 5 We as reemen FPlessy v.
    [Show full text]
  • The Road to Civil Rights Table of Contents
    The Road to Civil Rights Table of Contents Introduction Dred Scott vs. Sandford Underground Railroad Introducing Jim Crow The League of American Wheelmen Marshall “Major” Taylor Plessy v. Ferguson William A. Grant Woodrow Wilson The Black Migration Pullman Porters The International Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters The Davis-Bacon Act Adapting Transportation to Jim Crow The 1941 March on Washington World War II – The Alaska Highway World War II – The Red Ball Express The Family Vacation Journey of Reconciliation President Harry S. Truman and Civil Rights South of Freedom Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka Too Tired to Move When Rulings Don’t Count Boynton v. Virginia (1960) Freedom Riders Completing the Freedom Ride A Night of Fear Justice in Jackson Waiting for the ICC The ICC Ruling End of a Transition Year Getting to the March on Washington The Civil Rights Act of 1964 The Voting Rights March The Pettus Bridge Across the Bridge The Voting Rights Act of 1965 March Against Fear The Poor People’s Campaign Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Completing the Poor People’s Campaign Bureau of Public Roads – Transition Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Rodney E. Slater – Beyond the Dreams References 1 The Road to Civil Rights By Richard F. Weingroff Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." But when . you take a cross country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you . then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.
    [Show full text]
  • Plessy V. Ferguson
    Plessy v. Ferguson On June 7, 1892, a 30-year-old colored shoemaker named Homer Plessy was jailed for sitting in the "White" car of the East Louisiana Railroad. Plessy was only one-eighths black and seven- eighths white, but under Louisiana law, he was considered black and therefore required to sit in the "Colored" car. Plessy went to court and argued, in Homer Adolph Plessy v. The State of Louisiana, that the Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. The judge at the trial was John Howard Ferguson, a lawyer from Massachusetts who had previously declared the Separate Car Act "unconstitutional on trains that traveled through several states" . In Plessy's case, however, he decided that the state could choose to regulate railroad companies that operated only within Louisiana. He found Plessy guilty of refusing to leave the white car . Plessy appealed to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, which upheld Ferguson's decision. In 1896, the Supreme Court of the United States heard Plessy's case and found him guilty once again. Speaking for a seven-person majority, Justice Henry Brown wrote: "That [the Separate Car Act] does not conflict with the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery...is too clear for argument...A statute which implies merely a legal distinction between the white and colored races -- a distinction which is founded in the color of the two races, and which must always exist so long as white men are distinguished from the other race by color -- has no tendency to destroy the legal
    [Show full text]
  • Articles the Anticanon
    VOLUME 125 DECEMBER 2011 NUMBER 2 © 2011 by The Harvard Law Review Association ARTICLES THE ANTICANON Jamal Greene CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 380 I. DEFINING THE ANTICANON ............................................................................................ 385 II. DEFENDING THE ANTICANON ........................................................................................ 404 A. The Anticanon’s Errors..................................................................................................... 405 1. Dred Scott v. Sandford ............................................................................................... 406 2. Plessy v. Ferguson ...................................................................................................... 412 3. Lochner v. New York ................................................................................................... 417 4. Korematsu v. United States ....................................................................................... 422 B. A Shadow Anticanon ........................................................................................................ 427 III. RECONSTRUCTING THE ANTICANON ............................................................................ 434 A. Historicism ........................................................................................................................ 435 1. Dred Scott ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]