The Historical Background Of Plessy Vs. Ferguson

In 1896, the United States Supreme Court decided in favor of maintaining segregation in the now infamous case, Plessy v Ferguson. While claiming to set the standard “separate but equal,” the Plessy v Ferguson decision set back racial equality for almost 60 years, calling into question whether the United States Supreme Court had been granted too much power. It was on May 18th in 1896 when this historical decision changed the lives of many. The Plessy v Ferguson decision codified the practice of racial segregation. The ruling of the case provided justification for segregation of public and private institutions. To say we are "separate but equal" was an understatement and unfair to those who suffered; making the blacks and whites use separate

What was the Historical background of Plessy v Ferguson?
Plessy v Ferguson was a court case that happened to take place in the state of Louisiana, bring more camotion to the late 1800’s1. The Court case involved Homer Adolph Plessy an African-American who was very passionate in doing what was right for his people. He made a living by pursuing as an insurance broker/ salesman in Louisiana. It all began due to the intolerance of whites and blacks riding in the same area together aboard a train. Although Congress had passed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments as well as several civil rights laws to protect the newly freed population, the Southern commitment to white supremacy was intense, having the Jim Crow laws did not favor racial equality any further.(2) Knowing it was against the law for a black man to ride with the whites on their railroad car, Plessy took his chances, because he was mostly a white citizen. When Plessy boarded the train chaos abrupted. To end the chaos the conductor tried to remove Plessy by demanding him to exit off of the train, which Plessy refused. Sadly but evidently he ended up in the jail of Louisiana.(3) The Court of Louisiana ruled against him due to laws stating that whites and

There was never a “equal” part to the “separate but equal” principle. Justice Henry Brown of Michigan delivered the majority opinion, as he concluded he spoke, “If one race be inferior to the other socially, the Constitution of the United States cannot put them upon the same plane”(7) Plessy did no harm sitting on the train with whites, but they shamed him for something so minor concluding in injustice actions taken by the court. The Jim Crow law stated, passengers were required to sit in the appropriate areas or face a $25 fine or a 20-day jail sentence.(8) Plessy tried to fight the courts actions and do what he thought was right and protest for his race. Judge Ferguson could have acted upon his ruling in a more moral context but he sought taking away Plessy's right would benefit the whites, due to him breaking the law. There was no equality to his justification and so the words, “separate but equal” lost their meaning. The Plessy v Ferguson trial had another route it could have proceeded with but the Court was set on making the decision strictly how the majority acquired it to be. Judge Ferguson could have chosen a more moral decision like Justice Harlan chose to voice. Harlan voiced his opinion to what he thought was right for the case, but he was one against seven who had already come to an agreement. If three of the seven would have considered Harlan’s decision the odds would have been