Plessy v. Ferguson and the Fourteenth Amendment
Overview of the Civil War Amendments and Their Implications
Amendments post-Civil War: Abolished slavery, protected equal rights, guaranteed suffrage.
Thirteenth Amendment (1865): Officially abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime.
Fourteenth Amendment (1868): Granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States, including former enslaved people, and guaranteed all citizens "equal protection of the laws" and "due process of law."
Fifteenth Amendment (1870): Prohibited states from denying a citizen's right to vote based on "race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
Intent behind amendments: Eradicate slavery and impact other laws in various states (e.g., segregation in railroad cars). These amendments were designed to secure civil and legal rights for newly freed African Americans and to define what it meant to be a citizen.
Homer Plessy and the Challenge to Louisiana Law
Background of Homer Plessy:
Descended from mixed race (7/8 white, 1/8 black). Under Louisiana law, even a small percentage of African ancestry classified a person as black.
Legally challenged the "Separate Car Act" of 1890, which mandated segregated railway cars for blacks and whites, in an effort to end racial segregation in public accommodations.
The Legal Challenge:
Organized attempt by the "Citizens' Committee" (Comité des Citoyens) of New Orleans to contest Louisiana law; Plessy, appearing to be white, deliberately sat in a whites-only section on the East Louisiana Railway.
Plessy identified himself as mixed-race, refused to move to the 'colored' car, and was arrested for violating the state's segregation law.
Tried and convicted in a New Orleans court before Judge John Howard Ferguson.
Case escalated through Louisiana courts to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Constitutional Grounds of the Challenge
Thirteenth Amendment: Argument it violated the abolition of slavery. Plessy's counsel argued that forced segregation imposed a "badge of servitude" akin to slavery.
Fourteenth Amendment: Claimed it denied equal protection of the laws and liberty without due process.
Specifically, the Equal Protection Clause stated that no state shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Plessy's lawyers argued that mandated segregation inherently implied inequality and deprived African Americans of equal protection.
The Due Process Clause (no state shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law") was also invoked, arguing that segregation arbitrarily restricted Plessy's liberty.
Emphasis on liberty as a concept and how it relates to state law. The challenge highlighted how state-mandated segregation limited an individual's freedom and dignity based on race.
Supreme Court Proceedings and Outcome
Supreme Court's Holding:
Ruled 7-1 against Plessy; upheld Louisiana segregation law.
Justified segregation as not violating Thirteenth or Fourteenth Amendments, asserting that the legislative intent of the 14th Amendment was to provide political and civil equality, not social equality.
Justice Brown's Majority Opinion:
Differentiated between legal separation and slavery; argued legal distinctions based on race did not imply inferiority or inequality if the facilities were "separate but equal."
Viewed segregation as reflective of majority societal desires, primarily aimed at preserving public peace and order, rather than discriminating against a disfavored race. He stated that "legislation is powerless to eradicate racial instincts or to abolish distinctions based upon physical differences."
Police Powers Argument: Discussed the state's inherent authority to legislate for the health, safety, and morals of its citizens, deferring to state regulations unless deemed unreasonable or arbitrary. The Court found Louisiana's "Separate Car Act" to be a reasonable exercise of police power.
Separate but Equal Doctrine: Established constitutional precedent that segregation could be constitutional if facilities provided for each race were deemed equal in quality. This doctrine codified racial segregation for over half a century.
Justice Harlan's Dissent
Position on Thirteenth Amendment:
Argued Louisiana law perpetuated badges of servitude, contrary to amendment's spirit, by imposing a mark of inferiority on African Americans.
Liberty Concerns:
Held that segregation restricted liberty of both races; deemed unconstitutional without adequate rationale, infringing on personal freedom and dignity.
Critique of Reasonable Regulation:
Challenged the legality of distinguishing reasonable vs. unreasonable segregation, asserting that any law based on race was inherently unreasonable and arbitrary.
Predicted further racial segregation and subjugation if this precedent were allowed, stating the ruling would "stimulate aggressions, more or less brutal and irritating, upon the admitted rights of colored citizens."
Color Blind Constitution Concept:
Famously asserted that "Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens," meaning the law should treat all citizens equally regardless of race and not recognize racial distinctions in legal rights or privileges.
Historical Context and the Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment
Disagreement on the Purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment:
While the majority of society viewed the amendment as incompatible with racial discrimination, some contemporaries, particularly in Southern states, allowed for segregation, interpreting the amendment narrowly.
The era of Reconstruction and its subsequent rollback through Jim Crow laws heavily influenced the Court's interpretation.
Justice Harlan's Perspective:
Emphasized intended equality under the law, opposing state-sponsored discrimination, and advocating for a broad interpretation that would protect individuals from state action based on race. He believed the true intention was to prevent states from making or enforcing any law that would abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens.
Transition to Brown v. Board of Education
Overturning Plessy:
More than 50 years later, Brown v. Board of Education (1954) marks a pivotal shift from the precedent established in Plessy; the Supreme Court unanimously recognized the inherent distinction between "separate but equal," especially in public education.
Chief Justice Warren's Rationale:
Focused on the modern understanding of equal protection, moving beyond the historical intent of the 14th Amendment's framers to address the contemporary social reality.
Cited psychological studies (e.g., the "Doll Test" by Kenneth and Mamie Clark) illustrating the severe psychological harm of segregation on minority children's self-esteem and educational opportunities.
Court's Findings on Equality in Education:
Unanimously declared that "separate educational facilities are inherently unequal," directly violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court reasoned that segregation generated a feeling of inferiority among African American children as to their status in the community that adversely affected their motivation to learn.
Impact on Segregation Laws:
The Brown ruling emboldened the Civil Rights Movement, laying the legal groundwork to dismantle state-sponsored segregationist policies, particularly in public education, and influencing subsequent legislation like the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Conclusions on Legal and Social Implications
Justice Harlan vs. the Court's Majority:
Highlighted fundamental disagreements on racial discrimination and legal interpretation that continue to resonate in American jurisprudence. Harlan's dissent eventually became the dominant view through Brown.
Ongoing Implications:
The debate surrounding the color-blind constitution continues in modern discussions on race-based policies and affirmative action, raising questions about whether state policies can ever consider race, even to remedy past discrimination.