Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Plessy V. Ferguson

Abraham Lincoln's success in the Civil War and the end of slavery signaled the beginning of a new era for blacks in America. However, in an attempt to restrict the freedom of newly freed blacks, many Southern states passed “black codes” that limited blacks’ right to vote, to engage in certain occupations, and to participate in the judicial system. In response, the “radical Republicans” in Congress passed a civil rights bill and Reconstruction acts to limit the impact of the black codes and guarantee blacks their rights. But lawmakers intimidated by such organizations as the Ku Klux Klan passed laws that segregated blacks from whites. While the Fourteenth Amendment ended slavery, it still left many questions about the relations between blacks and whites unanswered. These questions became a significant factor in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), in which the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a Louisiana law mandating “separate but equal” accommodations for blacks and whites on intrastate railroads was constitutional. This decision provided the legal foundation to justify many other actions by state and local governments to socially separate blacks and whites.

A Legal Challenge to Segregation

The arrest of Homer Adoph Plessy (1862–1925) on June 7, 1892 was part of a planned challenge to the constitutionality of the 1890 Louisiana Separate Car Act by the Citizens’Committee, a small group of black professionals in New Orleans. The committee hired the white lawyer and novelist Albion Winegar Tourgée, who had begun calling attention to separate-car laws in his newspaper column in August of 1891. After the committee successfully led a test case in State v. Desdunes, in which the Louisiana district court declared forced segregation in railroad cars traveling between states to be unconstitutional, the committee was anxious for a case to test the constitutionality of segregation on railroad cars operating solely within a single state. Part of Tourgée's strategy was to have someone of mixed blood violate the law, since to do so would allow him to question the arbitrariness by which people were classified “colored.” Plessy, a Louisiana Creole of Haitian descent who was a mix of seven-eighths white and one-eighth black, agreed to be the test case.

The committee arranged with the railroad conductor and with a private detective to detain Plessy until he was arrested. This challenge received some silent support from railroad companies, which did not like the added expense of providing separate cars. A month after his arrest, Plessy came before a Louisiana district court presided over by Justice John Howard Ferguson. A native of Massachusetts, Ferguson had ruled earlier in the States v. Desdunes case that the separate car act was unconstitutional on interstate trains because of the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce. When Plessy appeared before the Louisiana district court, the court ruled that a state had the constitutional power to regulate railroad companies operating solely within its borders and concluded that the Louisiana Separate Car Act was indeed constitutional. The decision was appealed to the state supreme court in 1893 and was appealed again to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1896.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading