Cornell College: Department

This case that occurred in

This case when compared and

of Politics. (1999, August 20).

1878 showed how segregation

contrasted to Plessy vs

Retrieved September 26,

was seen as an identity for not

Ferguson is seen as a result

2015.

only the colored population

from that case to me. The fact

but Supreme Court judges as

that laws and lawmakers took

well. This can be seen in how

the equal clause and validated

the Supreme Court justice

it made it part of everyday

Waite phrased the ruling. The

life. Both cases made it the

court defined not giving even

status quo.

segregation a lack of rights

and put segregation in the

This case lead me to analyze

light of fairness. To deny a

Plessy as since it happened

citizen of a segregated state

after and it covered similar

segregation is to discriminate

aspects of segregation in a

based on race and color. The

persons life that there was a

Jim Crow era made

connection to look into.

segregation a root idea it was

a state by states act of
fairness. The fact a colored
person argued this also speaks
for the fact the life style
became common and suing
needed to happen when it was

denied. More over the

Supreme Court weakened
other states claims on this
being unfair. It was not an
interstate issue according to
the ruling it was an individual
states way. This case along
with Plessy vs Ferguson only
strengthened the prosegregation stance. This effect
is to the point not even
businesses that travel between
states can ignore it if a state
Wormser, R. (2002). The Rise

requires it.
In Plessy vs Fergusson only

In the initial ruling of the

of Jim Crow. Retrieved

one judge had a dissenting

equal clause in this case the

September 26, 2015.

opinion on the separate but

idea that it only makes the

equal clause. This shows a

races distinct. All but one

very powerful position the

concurred in the supreme

idea of segregation had on

court.

even the highest court of

America. Justice Henry

This case will lead me to look

Brown said it was merely a

into the make-up of home

distinction between races and

states of each judge, both

nothing more. This shows he

dissenting and agreeing with

himself had a very narrow

the notion, and seeing if there

view on the topic not really

is any connections still

looking into it beyond the

strongly related to south and

idealist positives. He goes

north.

further to say the fourteenth

amendment was never to get
rid of such distinctions as race
or to force people who do not
want to mingle to mingle so
segregation is okay. All the
other judges did not dissent so
their point must have been in
line enough to support his
claim. The only dissenter
justice John Harlan saw a
difference in the tone of the
constitution and the ruling. If
the constitution is color blind
why is the court supporting a
non-color blind bias? He also
makes the point of classes and
how the constitution does not

support such ideas ether. He

could tell that this would make
classes between the races. The
word equal in this ruling is
very crucial as it persuaded
many to the clauses side.