Plessy vs. Ferguson 1896
DETAILS OF THE CASE:
Homer Adolph Plessy, a black man who was 7/8 Caucasian, took a seat in the white only section of the train, and after being asked to move, he refused and resulted in his arrest in Louisiana, in which it was legal for trains to separate white and blacks on the railway cars.
CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION:
Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?
DECISION AND LASTING EFFECT: 7 votes for Ferguson, 1 against. US Const. Amendment 14 Section 1. Based on the separate but equal doctrine, the state law was in constitutional boundaries. Segregation does not constitute itself with unlawful discrimination. From this case, it was established that "seperate but equal" is okay.
Homer Adolph Plessy, a black man who was 7/8 Caucasian, took a seat in the white only section of the train, and after being asked to move, he refused and resulted in his arrest in Louisiana, in which it was legal for trains to separate white and blacks on the railway cars.
CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION:
Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?
DECISION AND LASTING EFFECT: 7 votes for Ferguson, 1 against. US Const. Amendment 14 Section 1. Based on the separate but equal doctrine, the state law was in constitutional boundaries. Segregation does not constitute itself with unlawful discrimination. From this case, it was established that "seperate but equal" is okay.