Plessy v. Ferguson: Difference between revisions

[accepted revision][accepted revision]
Content deleted Content added
Reverting edit(s) by 2600:8800:8E80:1C00:1975:DA7A:23E3:DC43 (talk) to rev. 1206790481 by Rontrigger: Vandalism (RW 16.1)
No edit summary
 
(31 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{short description|1896 U.S. Supreme Court case on racial segregation}}
{{redirect-distinguish|Plessy|the case's plaintiff|Homer Plessy|the British company|Plessey}}
{{pp-pc}}
{{Use American English|date=May 2022}}
Line 27:
|NotParticipating = Brewer
|LawsApplied = [[Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|U.S. Const. amends. XIII]], [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|XIV]]; [[Separate Car Act|1890 La. Acts No. 111]], p. 152, § 1
|Overruled = (''de facto'') ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'' (1954), and subsequent rulings{{sfnp|Schauer|1997|p=280}}<br/>''[[Bob Jones University v. United States]]'' (1983){{efn|According to the [[Library of Congress]]}}<ref name=LOCtable/><ref name=LOCappx/>
}}
{{wikisource|Plessy v. Ferguson|''Plessy v. Ferguson''}}
 
'''''Plessy v. Ferguson''''', 163 U.S. 537 (1896), was a [[List of landmark court decisions in the United States|landmark]] [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]] decision ruling that [[racial segregation]] laws did not violate the [[Constitution of the United States|U.S. Constitution]] as long as the facilities for eachpeople raceof color were equal in quality to those of white people, a doctrine that came to be known as "[[separate but equal]]".{{sfnp|Nowak|Rotunda|2012|loc=§ 18.8(c)}}<ref>{{cite journal |last=Groves |first=Harry E. |year=1951 |title=Separate but Equal—The Doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson |journal=Phylon |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=66–72 |doi=10.2307/272323 |jstor=272323}}</ref> The decision legitimized the many state "[[Jim Crow laws]]" re-establishing racial segregation that had been passed in the [[Southern United States|American South]] ("[[Jim Crow laws]]") after the end of the [[Reconstruction era]] in 1877. Such legally enforced segregation in the southSouth lasted into the 1960s.
 
The underlying case began in 1892 when [[Homer Plessy]], a mixed-race man, deliberately boarded a whites-only train car in [[New Orleans]]. By boarding the whites-only car, Plessy violated [[Louisiana]]'s [[Separate Car Act]]|Separate Car Act of 1890]], which required "equal, but separate" railroad accommodations for white and non-white passengers. Plessy was charged under the Act, and at his trial his lawyers argued that judge [[John Howard Ferguson]] should dismiss the charges on the grounds that the Act was unconstitutional. Ferguson denied the request, and the [[Louisiana Supreme Court]] upheld Ferguson's ruling on appeal. Plessy then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
In May 1896, the Supreme Court issued a 7–1 decision against Plessy, ruling that the Louisiana law did not violate the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution]] and stating that although the Fourteenth Amendment established the legal equality of whites and blacks, it did not and could not require the elimination of all "distinctions based upon color". The Court rejected Plessy's lawyers' arguments that the Louisiana law inherently implied that black people were inferior, and gave great deference to American state legislatures' inherent power to make laws regulating health, safety, and morals—the "[[police power (United States constitutional law)|police power]]"—and to determine the reasonableness of the laws they passed. Justice [[John Marshall Harlan]] was the lone dissenter from the Court's decision, writing that the U.S. Constitution "is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens", and so the law'slaws distinguishing of passengers' races should have been found unconstitutional.
 
''Plessy'' is widely regarded as one of the worst decisions in U.S. Supreme Court history.<ref>{{harvp|Amar|2011|p=76}}; {{harvp|Epstein|1995|p=99}}.</ref> Despite its infamy, the decision has never been explicitly overruled.{{sfnp|Lofgren|1987|pp=204–05}} However, a series of the Court's later decisions, beginning with thein 1954 decisionwith ''[[Brown v. Board of Education]]'', which held that the "separate but equal" doctrine is unconstitutional in the context of public schools, a series of the Court's later decisions have severely weakened ''Plessy'' to the point that it is considered to have been ''de facto'' overruled.{{sfnp|Schauer|1997|pp=279–80}} The [[Library of Congress]] regards ''Plessy'' as not having been expressly overruled until ''[[Bob Jones University v. United States]]''.<ref name=LOCtable>{{cite web |url=https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overruled/ |title=Table of Supreme Court Decisions Overruled by Subsequent Decisions |website=constitution.congress.gov |access-date=July 9, 2022}}</ref><ref name=LOCappx>{{cite web |url=https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/appx.1/ALDE_00000065 |title=Appendix 1.2: Methodology for the Table of Supreme Court Decisions Overruled by Subsequent Decisions |website=constitution.congress.gov |access-date=June 10, 2023}} Footnote 13.</ref>
 
==Background==
Line 81:
 
===Harlan's dissent===
[[File:JudgeJMHarlan.jpg|thumb|upright=0.85|[[Justice John Marshall Harlan]] became known as the "Great Dissenter" for his fiery dissent in ''Plessy'' and other early civil rights cases.]]
Justice [[John Marshall Harlan]] was the lone dissenter from the Court's decision. Harlan strongly disagreed with the Court's conclusion that the Louisiana railcar law did not imply that black people were inferior, and he accused the majority of being willfully ignorant on the subjectissue.
{{Blockquote
|text=Every one knows that the statute in question had its origin in the purpose, not so much to exclude white people from railroad cars occupied by blacks, as to exclude colored people from coaches occupied by or assigned to white persons. ... The thing to accomplish was, under the guise of giving equal accommodation for whites and blacks, to compel the latter to keep to themselves while traveling in railroad passenger coaches. No one would be so wanting in candor as to assert the contrary.
Line 89:
To support his argument, Harlan pointed out that the Louisiana law contained an exception for "nurses attending children of the other race". This exception allowed black women who were [[nanny|nannies]] to white children to be in the white-only train cars.{{sfnp|Amar|2011|p=85}} Harlan said that this showed that the Louisiana law only allowed black people to be in white-only cars if it was obvious that they were "social subordinates" or "domestics".{{sfnp|Amar|2011|p=85}}
 
In a now-famous passage, Harlan forcefully argued that even though many white Americans of the late 19th century considered themselves superior to Americansthose of other races, the U.S. Constitution was "color-blind" inregarding matters ofthe law and civil rights.{{sfnp|Chemerinsky|2019|loc=§&nbsp;9.3.1, p. 761}}
{{Blockquote
|text=The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. And so it is in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth and in power. ... But in view of the constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful. The law regards man as man, and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when his civil rights as guaranteed by the supreme law of the land are involved.
|source=''Plessy'', 163 U.S. at 559 (Harlan, J., dissenting).<ref name="ReferenceA">Quoted in part in {{harvp|Chemerinsky|2019|loc=§&nbsp;9.3.1, p. 761}}.</ref>
}}
Harlan predicted that the Court''Plessy''s decision would eventually become as infamous as the Court'sits 1857 decision ''[[Dred Scott v. Sandford]]'', in which the Court had ruled that black Americans could not be citizens under the U.S. Constitution, and that its legal protections and privileges could never apply to them.
 
==Aftermath==
Line 100:
 
==Significance==
[[File:ColoredDrinkingNegro drinking at "Colored" water cooler in streetcar terminal, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma by Russell Lee.jpg|thumb|upright=1.2|An [[Oklahoma City]] streetcar terminal's "colored" drinking fountain, 1939<ref>{{cite web|last=Lee|first=Russell|title=Negro drinking at "Colored" water cooler in streetcar terminal, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma|work=Prints & Photographs Online Catalog|publisher=[[Library of Congress]] Home|date=July 1939|url=https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/fsa1997026728/PP/|access-date=March 23, 2005}}</ref>]]''Plessy'' legitimized state laws establishing "racial" segregation in the [[Southern United States|South]] and provided an impetus for further segregation laws. It also legitimized laws in the North requiring "racial" segregation, such as in the Boston school segregation case noted by Justice Brown in his majority opinion.<ref>{{cite book|last=Brands|first=H. W.|title=American Colossus|location=New York|publisher=Anchor Books|date=2010|page=466}}</ref> Legislative achievements won during the [[Reconstruction Era]] were erased through means of the "separate but equal" doctrine.<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1954/07/segregation-and-the-supreme-court/6055|title=Segregation and the Supreme Court|last=Sutherland| first=Arthur E. Jr. |author-link=Arthur E. Sutherland Jr.|magazine=The Atlantic Monthly|date=July 1954}}</ref> The doctrine had been strengthened also by an 1875 Supreme Court decision that limited the federal government's ability to intervene in state affairs, guaranteeing to Congress only the power "to restrain states from acts of racial discrimination and segregation".<ref name="oldfield">{{cite journal |last1=Oldfield |first1=John |title=State politics, railroads, and Civil Rights in South Carolina, 1883–89 |journal=American Nineteenth Century History |date=January 2004 |volume=5 |issue=2 |pages=71–91 |doi=10.1080/1466465042000257864 |s2cid=144234514 }}</ref> The ruling basically granted states legislative immunity when dealing with questions of "race", guaranteeing the states' right to implement racially separate institutions, requiring them only to be equal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.americanhistory.si.edu/brown/history/1-segregated/separate-but-equal.html|title=Separate But Equal: The Law of the Land|publisher=Smithsonian National Museum of American History Behring Center}}</ref>
 
[[File:JimCrowCar2.jpg|left|upright=1.2|thumb|1904 caricature of "White" and "[[Jim Crow]]" rail cars by [[John T. McCutcheon]]]]Despite the pretense of "separate but equal", non-whites essentially always received inferior facilities and treatment, if they received them at all.<ref>{{cite book|last=McCutheon|first=John |title=The Mysterious Stranger and Other Cartoons|publisher=McClure, Phillips & Co.|date=1905}}</ref>{{page needed|date=May 2021}}
Line 172:
* [http://landmarkcases.c-span.org/Case/19/Plessy-v-Ferguson ''Plessy v. Ferguson''] from [[C-SPAN]]'s ''[[Landmark Cases: Historic Supreme Court Decisions]]''
* [https://www.newspapers.com/topics/reconstruction/plessy-v-ferguson/ Newspaper articles and clippings about ''Plessy v. Ferguson'' at Newspapers.com]
* [https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/the-road-to-separate-but-equal.htm#:~:text=The%20rights%20stated%20in%20the%20Fourteenth%20Amendment%20have,as%20long%20as%20it%20was%20%E2%80%9Cseparate%20but%20equal.%E2%80%9D/ ''The Road to 'Separate But Equal'''] from the [[National Park Service]]
* [https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/plessy-v-ferguson/ Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)] from the [[National Archives and Records Administration]]
 
{{Civil rights movement}}