15. Plessy v. Ferguson upheld the legality of racial segregation under the justification of “separate but equal”
Following passage of the Separate Car Act in 1890 in Louisiana, which required separate accommodations for blacks and whites on all railroads including the use of different railway cars, Homer Plessy – an individual who was seven-eighths of European descent and just one-eighth African, consequently being designated as “colored” – served as the plaintiff as part of an organized bid to overturn the discriminatory legislation. Arrested upon taking his seat in a first-class whites-only railway car, Plessy sought legal redress under the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, stipulating equal treatment under the law.
However, failing to find a receptive response at the state level, Plessy appealed to the United States Supreme Court in 1896. Represented by white supremacist Milton Joseph Cunningham, Louisiana defended itself vigorously against Plessy’s claims. Ruling 7-1 in Louisiana’s favor, the court dismissed any applicability of the Thirteenth Amendment, determining it merely provided the most basic provisions of legal equality to ensure freedom from slavery. Furthermore, the Supreme Court resolved that laws demanding racial separation did not inherently imply any racial inferiority but were instead provisions of necessary policing powers required by a state to function. Provided services treated customers as “separate but equal”, the court reasoned no crime was being committed by a state in segregating individuals by race.