Essay PreviewMore ↓
Plessy decided to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, but that court upheld Ferguson's opinion. Plessy then decided to take his case to the United States Supreme Court. In 1896, The Supreme Court of the United States found Homer Plessy guilty once again. Justice Henry Brown, the speaker for the eight-person majority, 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 equality of the two races...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."
The one lone dissenter, who argued in favor of Plessy's case, and seemed to be the only one with a real understanding of equality, was Justice John Harlan. He wrote his own speech regarding the case and its decision.
"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...In my opinion, the judgment this day rendered will, in time, prove to be quite as pernicious as the decision made by this tribunal in the Dred Scott case...The present decision, it may well be apprehended, will not only stimulate aggressions, more or less brutal and irritating, upon the admitted rights of colored citizens, but will encourage the belief that it is possible, by means of state enactments, to adopted the recent amendments of the Constitution.
How to Cite this Page
"Plessy vs. Ferguson." 123HelpMe.com. 31 Mar 2020
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.” Said Justice John Marshall Harlan in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson. (“Oyez, Oyez, Oh Yay!”) In 1890 Louisiana surprisingly got the ability to pass a law called the Separate Car Act that said that all railroad companies that carried passengers must provide separate but equal services for both white and non-white passengers. (“Landmark Cases”) The penalty for sitting in a white-designated railroad car when you were not of that ethnicity was a fine of twenty-five dollars or twenty days in jail.... [tags: Case Study]
1226 words (3.5 pages)
- Plessy vs. Ferguson Homer Plessy vs. the Honorable John H. Ferguson ignited the spark in our nation that ultimately led to the desegregation of our schools, which is shown in the equality of education that is given to all races across the country today. “The Plessy decision set the precedent that ‘separate’ facilities for blacks and whites were constitutional as long as they were ‘equal’” (“The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow”). The case of Plessy vs. Ferguson not only illuminated the racial inequality within our education system, but also brought to light how the standard of ‘separate but equal’ affected every aspect of African American lives.... [tags: decisive court cases]
1143 words (3.3 pages)
- In the film, “Simple Justice” the ‘separate but equal’ of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) to the unanimous 1954 overturn of Plessy in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka without discussing the tortuous legal and political path that resulted in eventual public school desegregation. It caused a huge diversity among the schools, for whites and blacks but it wasn’t enough because people kept questioning about Plessy v. Ferguson, especially of Jim Crown laws regarding the changes they wanted to have. Therefore the film “Simple Justice” indicates the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v.... [tags: Brown v. Board of Education]
715 words (2 pages)
- Throughout history, segregation has always been a part of United States history. This is showed through the relationships between the blacks and whites, the whites had a master-slave relationship and the blacks had a slave-master relationship. And this is also true after the civil war, when the blacks attained rights. Even though they had obtained rights the whites were always one step above them and lead superiority over them continuously. This is true in the Supreme court case “Plessy v. Ferguson”.... [tags: Supreme Court of the United States]
1113 words (3.2 pages)
- Plessy vs.Ferguson The case of Plessy vs. Ferguson started when a 30-year-old colored shoemaker named Homer Plessy was put in jail for sitting in the white car of the East Louisiana Railroad on June 7, 1892. Even though Plessy was only one-eighths black and seven-eighths white, he was considered black by Louisiana law. Plessy didn’t like this idea, and so he went to court and argued in the case of Homer Adolph Plessy v. The State of Lousiana that the Separate Car Act, which forced segregation of train cars, violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.... [tags: essays research papers]
343 words (1 pages)
- Plessy vs. Ferguson Plessy v. Ferguson , a very important case of 1896 in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the legality of racial segregation. At the time of the ruling, segregation between blacks and whites already existed in most schools, restaurants, and other public facilities in the American South. In the Plessy decision, the Supreme Court ruled that such segregation did not violate the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. This amendment provides equal protection of the law to all U.S.... [tags: Racism Racial Segregation Essays History]
1278 words (3.7 pages)
- Plessy v. Ferguson This was a petition filed in the supreme court of Louisiana in 1896, by Homer Plessy, the plaintiff. He filed this petition against the Honorable John H. Ferguson, judge of The petitioner was a citizen of the United States and a descent meaning he had both white and African American ethnic backgrounds. Keep in mind that at this time Blacks were not considered equal to whites. Mr. Plessy to be exact was seven-eights Caucasian and one-eighth African American blood.... [tags: Papers]
775 words (2.2 pages)
- Plessy went to court and argued that the Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. The judge, a Massachusetts lawyer, was John Howard Ferguson. He had previously declared the Separate Car Act "unconstitutional on trains that traveled through several states." However, in regards to the Plessy trial, he stated that Louisiana could regulate railroad companies that only operated within its state. Ferguson found Plessy guilty of refusing to leave the white car.... [tags: essays research papers]
1074 words (3.1 pages)
- Plessy v. Ferguson The moment the first slave was brought to America a ball was set in motion that one day somewhere and somehow a distinction between races had to be dealt with. The Civil War helped to make a stand against enslavement. A few years later in Plessy v. Ferguson another step was taken to give blacks equal but separate treatment and access to public facilities. After taking a giant leap into the future, fifty-eight years, we have another landmark case. In Brown v. Board of Education, the separate but equal law was revised to bring the races together in the same public facilities with access to the same public resources.... [tags: Papers]
895 words (2.6 pages)
- Throughout American History, many minorities have fallen victim to cruel discrimination and inequality, African Americans were one of such minorities that greatly suffered from the white majority’s upper hand. After the end of the Civil War and the Reconstruction period following it, many people, especially the Southern population, were extremely against African Americans obtaining equal rights in the American society. Due to this, these opponents did everything in their power to limit and even fully strip African Americans of their rights.... [tags: discrimination, inequality, African Americans]
1695 words (4.8 pages)
Baker v. Carr, case decided in 1962 by the U.S. Supreme Court. Tennessee had failed to reapportion the state legislature for 60 years despite population growth and redistribution. Charles Baker, a voter, brought suit against the state (Joe Carr was a state official in charge of elections) in federal district court, claiming that the dilution of his vote as a result of the state's failure to reapportion violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The court dismissed the complaint on the grounds that it could not decide a political question. Baker appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled that a case raising a political issue would be heard. This landmark decision opened the way for numerous suits on legislative apportionment.
Opinion: Justice Brennan Dissent: Harlan and Frankfurter
US vs Nixon
Subjects: Criminal Procedure: Discovery and Inspection
Facts of the Case
A grand jury returned indictments against seven of President Richard Nixon's closest aides in the Watergate affair. The special prosecutor appointed by Nixon and the defendants sought audio tapes of conversations recorded by Nixon in the Oval Office. Nixon asserted that he was immune from the subpoena claiming "executive privilege," which is the right to withhold information from other government branches to preserve confidential communications within the executive branch or to secure the national interest. Decided together with Nixon v. United States.
Is the President's right to safeguard certain information, using his "executive privilege" confidentiality power, entirely immune from judicial review?
No. The Court held that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified, presidential privilege. The Court granted that there was a limited executive privilege in areas of military or diplomatic affairs, but gave preference to "the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of justice." Therefore, the president must obey the subpoena and produce the tapes and documents. Nixon resigned shortly after the release of the tapes.
Opinion: Burger no dissent
Engel vs Vitale
Because of the prohibition of the First Amendment against the enactment of any law "respecting an establishment of religion," which is made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, state officials may not compose an official state prayer and require that it be recited in the public schools of the State at the beginning of each school day -- even if the prayer is denominationally neutral and pupils who wish to do so may remain silent or be excused from the room while the prayer is being recited. Opinion justice Black
Planned Parenthood vs Casey 1992
This case was a challenge to Pennsylvania's 1989 Abortion Control Act, portions of which reinstated restrictions previously ruled unconstitutional in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986).
The 1989 Act required the following :
(1) a woman seeking an abortion must give her informed consent prior to the procedure and be given state-provided information concerning her decision 24 hours before the abortion is performed
2) a minor seeking an abortion is required to obtain the informed consent of one parent or guardian, but has an option of judicial bypass
(3) a married woman is required to sign a statement indicating that she notified her husband of her intended abortion
(4) exemptions can be made in the event of a medical emergency
(5) facilities providing abortion services are required to keep records of the events
The court decision held that all of the above restrictions, except the husband-notification requirement, were constitutional. In reaching its decision, the court reaffirmed the validity of a woman's right to choose abortion under Roe v. Wade, but revoked its definition of that abortion right as "fundamental." The court constructed a new standard of review that allows restrictions on abortion prior to fetal viability so long as they do not constitute an "undue burden" to the woman. Pennsylvania's husband-notification requirement was determined to be unduly burdensome under this new standard.
Opinion: Justice O'conner kennedy, souter