A Brief History
On June 7, 1892, Homer Plessy, an African-American, was arrested for refusing to vacate his seat in a “Whites Only” railroad car. His case went to the Supreme Court of the United States, where a 7-1 majority ruled against Plessy, and upheld segregation laws in states that had them, as long as the “separate but equal” rule was followed. (Ferguson was the lower court judge that ruled against Plessy.)
Digging Deeper
This concept of separate but equal was thus the law of the land until the 1954 Supreme Court case, Brown vs. Board of Education, and much of the United States was officially segregated on racial terms. Louisiana had passed a law in 1890 creating racially segregated rail cars.
Not surprisingly, one of the justices on the Supreme Court that ruled against Plessy was Edward White (No kidding! How apropos!) who happened to be a member of a paramilitary white supremacist organization! (How this guy was not dismissed from the case is beyond ridiculous.)
We have referred to Mr. Plessy as African-American, but in reality he was only 1/8 African descent, the other 7/8 being white European, making him what they called back in the day, an “octoroon.” In those days, in Louisiana and many other Southern states an octoroon was considered “black” for legal purposes. (So, does that make me an “octoKraut?”)
Question for students (and subscribers): Was Homer Plessy right to challenge the segregation law by disobeying it? Mohandas K. Gandhi and African-American civil rights pioneers have also used this technique to challenge laws that seemed manifestly unjust, when normal ballot box recourse seemed unrealistic. Please share with us your thoughts on what laws should be challenged this way and conversely which ones should not in the comments section below this article.
If you liked this article and would like to receive notification of new articles, please feel welcome to subscribe to History and Headlines by liking us on Facebook and becoming one of our patrons!
Your readership is much appreciated!
Historical Evidence
For more information, please see…
Hoffer, WilliamJames Hull. Plessy v. Ferguson: Race and Inequality in Jim Crow America (Landmark Law Cases and American Society). University Press of Kansas, 2012.
Medley, Keith. We As Freemen: Plessy v. Ferguson. Pelican Publishing, 2012.
Thomas, Brook. Plessy v. Ferguson: A Brief History with Documents. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1996.
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="12625 https://www.historyandheadlines.com/?p=12625">148 Comments
I agree with Plessy’s actions. Although it may have seemed a small, perhaps purposeless fight against segregation, the collected acts of all who challenged the social norms of divided America eventually allowed the country to become closer to unity by forcing the people to rethink the prejudice upon which our country was acting.
Segregation divided this country and tore it apart. I agree with Plessy’s actions. He stood up for himself because he believed he should have the same rights as others. This case undoubtedly motivated citizens to push for equal rights.
I feel that Homer Plessy’s act of disobeying the law pushed our nation to realize that separate but equal laws were not always equal. It also urged America to take the time to realize segregation would not help to reunite the country.
If a rational person deems a law to be preposterous due to its racist nature, I think they should definitely challenge the law. If it’s not right, fight. America’s government is suppose to be driven by the people isn’t it? Then the people should make their opinions known about the laws of its country.
I agree with Plessy’s actions. He started to make the nation think about the “Separate but equal” laws.
I feel that Plessy made the United States understand that even though we said we were equal we weren’t actually always equal.
Plessy did the right thing to fight against segregation and to have a Edward White in his case was unfair.
I think Plessy made the right choice in challenging the laws supporting segregation.
i think that segregation was not a good thing so i agree that for him it was okay to challenge unfair laws.
I think Homer Plessy was right to challenge the segregation law by disobeying them because the laws were wrong and discriminated against blacks.
I believe Plessy really stuck it to the people of the U.S. and finally made everyone realize we are an equal country for equal opportunity when in reality we were no where near an “equal” country.
I agree with Plessy. I think that he did a right thing for fighting against segregation. I think it made everyone realize that the laws were wrong.
Plessy did a great thing for this country and he fought for what he believed was the right thing and fight for the end of segregation.
The Plessy v. Ferguson case is one that schools like to draw out of the cobwebs whenever discussing the Civil Rights Movement. Plessy was brave in his actions. He could have faced consequences that were much worse than what he did face. For his actions, his case is now known by most students, and he was one of the major figures during the Civil Rights Movement, even if he did not really succeed.
Plessy, in my opinion, did a good thing for the United States. He wanted to end segregation and continued to fight towards this goal. He impacted many people in a good way.
Personally I believe that Plessy did do the right thing in fighting against segregation. I never did agree with segregation and he was the one to actually fought for what was right.
I think the impact Plessy had on many people was extremely good. He fought to fight segregation, which was huge.
Plessy stood up for what he believed in and had an impact on many many people.
I think this really shows the discrimination that there was, especially because he was only 1/8 African American.
Plessy will always be remembered as one of the key pieces in history for helping gain African-American rights.
I think plessy was 100% right. sometimes you have to break the law to bring attention to the law. If no one was hurt then it was justifiable
Sometimes someone needs to stand up to things that are unjust, things like protests are a good example for today’s society
The impact that Plessy had on everyone it crazy. This article really shows the discrimination between everyone even though he wasn’t a full African American.
I have heard about Plessy vs. Ferguson and it is the racial segregation laws in public facilities under the ” separate but equal” rule.
I believe Plessy did exactly what anyone would have done in that position to fight for their rights and i am so happy it’s such a important topic in history now
Plessy did what any person who is having their rights infringed would do.
I had always heard of Brown vs. Board of Education, but this was my first time hearing about Plessy vs. Ferguson.I think it’s amazing how segregated Plessy was just because he was an eighth African American.
I believe that in that time challenging the segregation laws was a almost complete failure on a legal standpoint. But as far as a moral standpoint this case began the cultural change that in the 1950’s crumbled the segregation system apart.
The idea of separate but equal is crazy to me and it was wrong and these cases showed that even though blacks should have had rights that was not the case
the “separate but equal” rule may have been seen as a great step in the right direction when it was first set in place but looking back on it now and what problems it caused it did more help than harm and is still a potential issue in today’s world of racism. truthfully i feel as if it was something that was a bad decision in the movement to end racism.
The “separate but equal” law did not actually give equal facilities to African Americans. There were separate facilities for whites and blacks, but the black facilities were lower quality.
I think that looking back on history and seeing how divided the country was, if we didn’t have figures such as Plessy to stand up for their rights our country wouldn’t be as racially developed and equal as it is today.
Plessy had every right to stand up for his rights. The ‘separate but equal’ rule was completely unjust looking back on it now. If we did not have people that stood up for rights then, our country would not be where it is today.
Plessy v. Ferguson has always been a case that i found interesting to learn about and I definitely think Plessy had every right to challenge the “separate but equal” law because looking back on it now, I wouldn’t consider it equal at all
I think he was in the right defending his rights to be equal and equal, instead of separate and equal.
I am glad Plessy took a stand for what he believed to be right but I am not pleased with the fact that a white supremacist was on the panel of judges for this case.
how is it not racist if you put “separate but equal” because your still classifying them as separate. and as long as you do that most of the time they will still not be seen as equal. good for him to stand up for whats right
it’s good the plessy was standing up for what was right.
When someone is denied a right, such as equality, separate but equal is not equality, then I think it is ok to challenge a law by actively disobeying the law. If the law challenges a privilege then I think actively disobeying the law is not ok. There are other ways to get a law changed. The line between a right and a privilege is where the controversy will come into play.
Was defiantly a good thing that Plessy stood up for what he believed in
It was good that Plessy stood up for what was right.
Separate but equal is NOT equal. It’s ironic that Plessy was also only 1/8 African decent, yet still received such harsh, racist treatment. -Allison Lester
Separate but equal is in no way, equal. I was shocked to learn that Plessy was not even a full african-american.
1/8th african? seriously? how is this even a problem?! so petty.
Not only did bias happen in the court it still does today. How can you find anyone that is unbiased about a situation. Very hard to find and I know quite a few cases that people were treated unfairly compared to the rich who could get the best lawyers in the world.
I learned a lot about Plessy v Ferguson last year but not the details about Edward White being super racist and about Plessy only being 1/8 black.
How was a white supremacist a justice in court for the Plessy case.
In my opinion it is absolutely impossible to not be bias, but in this case the bias was obviously and everyone knew it. It’s s shame.
This was the motion that let the civil war live on. The oppression of african american lasted until almost 100 years later. So in that aspect, the civil war did not end until then and all of that fighting that both sides had in the war was only continued by violence in the streets about separation for years to come
Yes he was right to challenge or else we still might have color and white only signs.
this not fair to get segregation between whit and black people
we discussed this in my governemnt class, so it was nice to read this article as a refresher and to inform me of the case
There will obviously be biased opinions when you have a ‘black’ and a ‘white supremacist’ going against each other in court back then.
I do believe in his right to challenge the law in order for him to fully fight for what he believed were his God given right in which everyone is entitled to do.
It is great that Plessy stood up against “separate but equal”. He made a permanent impact on racial rights throughout American history. This is one case that I remember learning about multiple times in school.
If all races were truly equal, there would not have been separation. Standing up for your rights and fighting for equality should never be an issue, let along breaking the law.
The “separate but equal” rule sounds like justice, but if you look at how the system and laws are set it really does not give African Americans much dignity, respect or freedom because they are still looked at as lesser than other humans.
I guess I am confused to how the Supreme Court could interpret the “separate but equal” law as being legal. Also, I am stunned Edward White was on the Supreme Court. I guess no one vetted him before he was appointed to the Supreme Court.
I am shocked that they would allow edward white when he has conflict of interest
I think Homer Plessy did the right thing by challenging the segregation laws because they were ridiculous in my opinion. I also did not realize that he was only 1/8 African American and 7/8 European.
There were so many wrongs in this case. It’s hard for me to believe sometimes that our Country was so ignorant and cruel to the African Americans. I think Plessy did the right thing, we just didn’t do our job of providing a fair trial or serve proper justice. I think I would have done the same thing and I would challenge a law that a felt was unjust.
How horrible on all accounts. I am especially disturbed by the information about “octoroons” and how they were “considered ‘black’ for legal purposes” in Louisiana. That is appalling.
The segregation phase of our nation was horrible. It is horrible to think that this was happening less than a century ago. I believe that Plessy was fine sitting in that seat. He was predominately white, so i am shocked that they treated him as bad as the others. There is no call for the mistreating of African Americans at all, but I am shocked that they counted 1/8 African American as black rather than white.
The idea of “separate but equal” makes absolutely no sense. Under the doctrine, facilities were to provide both blacks and whites equal services and accommodations, housing, medical care, education, jobs, and public transportation. I can see how they though this was still fair, but more often than not, the African Americans were still given the “short end of the stick” when it came to these equal services and accommodations.
The amount of segregation and discrimination was astounding. I believe Plessy was aloud to sit in the seat because he was predominantly white.
As an education major, I’ve heard a lot about both the Plessy vs. Ferguson and Board of Education vs. Brown cases. Jordin is right when saying the separate but equal idea made no sense and although African Americans were given certain rights, they were not fairly treated. They definitely received the short end of the stick.
As someone who grew up with a mother who was a teacher I am familiar with Plessy vs. Ferguson and the BOE vs Brown cases. I think that we have all made valid points of “separate by equal” does not make sense. I think that Plessy should have been allowed to sit in whatever seat he so chose to sit in. The African Americans were not treated very fairly.
I think in certain cases, such as this one, it is okay to challenge the law by disobeying it. When your rights are being violated it should be okay to to disobey the law to make a change.
I never realized that Plessy was only one eighth African American and seven eighths European. This is very significant because although Plessy vs. Ferguson was a racial tension between two different races, there is more “white” color than black in the disagreement.
I have heard some about the Plessy vs. Ferguson case but I do not agree with it at all. I believe everyone should be treated equally no matter what decent they are. I know this was an issue during the time but it still occurs today although it has gotten a little bit better. If they wanted things “separate, but equal” than what is the point of having separate facilities if they are equal?
I have heard of this case before, but I was unaware of White’s personal background. The fact that White was a member of a paramilitary white supremacist organization and was obviously biased to the case. How he was not dismissed from the case blows my mind. There is no way that this was going to be a just trial with his personal background.
I am agree Taylor’s viewpoint. Everyone should be treated equally. Institutional racism is a kind of discrimination. Itself of the judgement was illegal.
I just knew about this case, I don’t recognize that people should be separated into different kinds of group. Everyone should be treated equally if they didn’t do things harmful to the society.
I also agree with Taylor on this one. All people should be treated equally, no matter their skin color or body composition. This was an issue at the time and I feel that we all realize that. But I feel that our society is coming to their senses and have high hopes of people being treated equally. I know that this is all that I hope for.
I’m familiar with this case, but it was nice to read about it again.
I could never comprehend what it was like during this time. I have learned about Brown vs. Board of Education in a former class. Very interesting article to read.
I remember learning about this case in high school so it was nice to read about it again!
This case made history therefor I think Plessy was right to challenge the law.
We have heard so much about this case, and learned all about it that I do believe he was right to challenge this ruling.
In a case of unfair punishment or being no way to avoid a crime I do believe that it is OK to challenge a law that has been broken to be in the favor of the one braking the law.
A law can be broken in certain circumstances when necessary and that is why the American court system exists. One of my favorite movies is A Time to Kill. The plot challenges whether there is a time that is acceptable to kill when faced with certain charges.
After reading this article, I can only say that I am beyond thankful to have not been living during this period of time. I cannot fathom how difficult it must have been to live in such segregation, and it frightens me that some places in today’s world still consider segregation and racism to be acceptable.
Most exceptions to laws occur after a person is arrested and charged. Once it goes to court and through appeals, then the laws change. So I guess somebody has to stand up and take a chance that can eventually help others,
Laws speak to the legality of an issue, not the morality. I whole-heartedly believe that if a law is unjust then one is obligated to disobey. This may not be the easiest coarse of action, but at times this is the only action that may spur change.
Segregation may mean “separate but equal” by definition, but it is racism pure and simple. Hard to believe we still live in a world that promotes segregation. There are high schools in the south that still participate in segregated proms!
I never knew that in the past when a person was even 1/8 they were still considered “black”. I could go on for days on how segregation is completely wrong. I believe that what he did was right , in breaking the law. Just because a law is the law does not automatically make it ethical. He was standing up for a rule he knew was ethically wrong.
I always fine the thought of segregation to be uneasy. I really have never understood the purpose or think it should ever be accepted. The sad thing is, some 117 years later its still an issue that has yet to be completely resolved.
Being 1/8th of any nationality seems highly insignificant to me. I think it’s absolutely insane that segregation was even a reality not that long ago but for 1/8th African-American? That just seems ludicrous! This country is blessed to have historical events like this because if there wasn’t any opposition to the law, our country wouldn’t be as accepting and wonderful as it is today.
I was necessary for Plessy to handle it the way he did. If African American people at the time did not take the strong stand they took change may have never come. Stronger measures needed to be taken and eyes needed to be opened. Going against the grain as Plessy did, whether he was 1/8 or full African American people started to wake up.
I do feel he had a right to stand up because he felt the law was unjust. This is how we have come so far with changing ways of the past, by one person standing up for what they believe in. It’s hard to imagine what the world would be like if no one would of spoken up for their beliefs.
OH SEGREGATION!!! I wish i could show this article to the inmates at prison now. They would never survive the real segregation.
Another example of our historical corruption against the american people by those in charge. It was those such as Plessy that paved the way for equal rights.
Personally, I feel that Plessy had every right to disobey this blatantly obnoxious law. It truly saddens me to read of such racism. In my opinion, Plessy should have been able sit anywhere that he wanted to. This is the first that I have ever heard of the term “octoroon”.
I think that Homer Plessy was right in standing against institutionalized racism. What was sad is the corruptness of the court system. Today if we had a judge who was bias in a court case we would demand that he be taken off the case, something that should have happened back then.
I think if there is a law against something that just isn’t fair against human rights, people have a right to stand against it. Yes, they are breaking the law but people have the right to stand up for something that they think is wrong.
Knowing that the Supreme Court upheld such a ridiculous law is just crazy. Racism is just a very disgusting way of life, calling someone an “octoroon” is so disrespectful and degrading, Octoroon means a person who is one-eighth black by descent.
Plessy Ferguson was a truly a courageous person of his day. He was willing to protest in a way that was in a non-violent way. The protestors of the modern day would have a lot to learn from Mr. Ferguson. I still find it sad that racism is still of the human race.
The fact that Edward White was not dismissed from the case is gut-wrenching to think about. Plessy Ferguson is someone history to look up to for standing up for what he believed in without violence as a crutch.
Homer Plessy wanted to change the law and sometimes the only way to do this is to take it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Plessy’s case was heard before Judge Ferguson one month after he was arrested, but it took four years to get to the U.S. Supreme Court. Plessy may not have won his case, but he open doors to the civil right movement by getting arrested.
It is so interesting to read about individuals that so bravely stood up for themselvesale even when doing so could cost them so greatly.
I felt he did ok by standing up for what he believes in to prove a point. Standing up for what you believe is our right. Just like all these protestors for Trump, it is their right to do that but stop breaking the law by breaking windows, burning things, all that is bad and not to be tolerated. Lets act right when we stand up for what we believe in.
Homer Plessy had every right to stand up for himself, even it meant breaking the law, but law should never be broken regardless if we agree with or the circumstances. He lived in a different time in history..
You should always stand up for what you believe in but, you should not do it in a manner that you are breaking current laws. If you feel strong enough that a law should be changed then do something about it. There is a proper way to challenge current law and you should do so accordingly.
It is always easier to point out things in retrospect. Social norms change and unacceptable things may be very common at another time. Who would have imagined sitting around the table with mom and dad and grandma while talking on the phone? That did not happen even though in my grandma’s house the phone was in the dining room on the buffet! Now it happens all of the time.
I feel there are many laws out there that are wrong and should be changed, with that being said I don’t feel it is right to break them. There are ways to go about working with others to have laws changed. Breaking laws does nothing but cause more problems.
While I wouldn’t advocate breaking a law just for fun, I would argue that sometimes you have to disobey in order to bring attention to a situation that warrants further scrutiny.
Breaking the law is not ok, however, back then there were many unjust laws. Today i think most laws are pretty fair. I think it was right for him to challenge the law.
I just think how different times would be if Plessy or anyone would never have challenged the laws of their time. Things might still be the same or could be worse, I for one am glad it is not.
This part of American history makes me sad.
Although I don’t agree with breaking the law, this was clearly an unjust law and I believe it needed to be challenged or we would never be where we are today.
Sometimes it takes a law being broke or a line to be crossed to create change in society. Though I believe most laws are in place for a reason, this specific law was something that needed challenged.
I believe you should stand up for what you believe in but do it in a manner that you are not breaking the law.If you feel differently about a law then you should act upon it in an appropriate manner
I think it took some real guts for Homer Plessy to refuse to vacate his seat in a “Whites Only” railroad car. He faced considerable blow back, to include losing his freedom, by standing up to fight the injustice of segregation. I also have a difficult time understanding the premise of the “separate but equal rule” that was law until 1954. Perhaps, I am enlightened because our country has come so far in race relations that is difficult to see the rule from the different perspective. I do believe, however, that Plessy was right to challenge segregation by disobeying it. If not, separate but equal would still be the law of the land if it were not for his sacrifice.
This is tough. I am a firm believer that we have laws for a reason, and they are meant to be followed. It is easy for us to sit here today and claim, “Of course he should have broke that stupid law!”, because we are more enlightened than a majority of the population in 1954. Yes, the law was ridiculous, and it is ridiculous that Edward White was not dismissed from Mr. Plessy’s case. All that being said, I think history speaks for this situation. He was brave. He made a difference. I think in this particular case, breaking the law was not only acceptable, but courageous.
I am familiar with segregation but not segregation that is spoken about above. Like someone mentioned already, it would be easy for us to say that the law should have been broken but in those days, when people were motivated socially, it made sense for the laws to be what they were and the law shouldn’t have been broken. Thank heavens for a different time now!
I think laws are a great guide line, but I don’t think laws are always purposeful and meaningful. If no one is getting hurt, or hurting someone else, I don’t see why breaking a few laws here and there matters. Driving the speed limit is a law, I consider that a suggestion…. I usually do 5-7mph (occasionally 10 mph on a nice open road) over on long trips, but I don’t speed in and out of traffic, cut people off, or get close to someone in front of me. I also don’t use cross walks if it is safe to cross otherwise. I certainly would not follow a law or encourage anyone else to follow a law that segregated or belittled another race, religion, or culture for the sake of our government who seems to be exempt from the law. There are so many legal loop holes and strategies to bypass the laws (If you have enough money and time) it seems to me that laws, as I stated earlier, are guide lines. Segregation laws were a bad guide line… perfectly fine to break and I applaud all that had the courage to do so!
Considering there was no act of violence, I see no harm in not giving up his seat. Furthermore, I find it extremely interesting Plessy was majority white with on 1/8 African American. Also, if White was on the court these days he would have been dismissed from the case, as he should have been for this case!
Yes, sometimes rules/laws must be broken to get them changed. For segregation to end people of color had to have a voice somehow.
It was interesting to know in those day, people considering “octoroon” as “Black”. From my personal perspective, if people does not break the law, there were not going to have many rules for people to obey the law.
In this case I would say breaking the law was necessary. Unfortunately we still see prejudice and racism today.
I never heard of that octoroon was considered “Black” for legal purpose. In fact, I think we should not break the law at any time. On the other hand, Law is for the people who are usually not able to control themselves based on their behavior and action.
It was right for Plessy to break the law and protest for his rights. In any situation where segregation rules, it take’s just one person to step up and challenge the status quo for change to occur. That is a hard thing to ask of anybody, though, and I think Plessy’s actions took courage.
This is a hard topic to try and state black and white when there is so much gray area. Yes, I think Homer Plessy was right to challenge the law in this case. I think it is good to have authority set in place, and the majority of the time they should be obeyed, but there are certain cases in which you need to tick up for our own beliefs. I think this often happens as a Christian. Laws are made or in some cases not made and it doesn’t follow along with he Christian faith.
I think it’s safe to say that most, if not everyone, knows the story of Rosa Parks; however, I doubt many people know the story of Homer Plessy. Plessy refused to vacate his seat in a “whites-only” railroad car. I am very familiar with the case Plessy v. Ferguson, as I have learned about it several times in a variety of classes, but I never actually learned about the back story of the case, including the people who were involved so it was interesting to learn about.
I think Homer Plessy had every right to remain in his seat. I know that during this time period it was technically against the law, but it was people like him that finally got the law to end segregation. I don’t understand how he was considered black when he is only 1/8 African descent. I have never agreed with segregation and I am glad that there are laws against it now.
I think the most current example of something like this would be the issue of gay marriage. No, the marriage was not able to happen without it being legal, but that also didn’t stop people from being with whom ever they felt was for them.
It is amazing to see the courage of people like Rosa Parks and Homer Plessy, and their dedication to fight for their rights. Segregation is and was a cruel thing in our country, but it is people like this who are the true heroes for the fight of ending segregation
I think man people have heard of the court cause Plessy vs. Ferguson, and knows thats it is a bout segregation but doesn’t know the main story of it. Homer Plessy left a big impact on many people.
I think it took a lot of courage for Plessy to take a stand for what was right. I definitely respect him for the stance he took.
While Plessy vs Ferguson is a very famous case, I never knew Homer Plessy was only 1/8 African descent.
People like Plessy and Rosa Parks are bold people who “put their foot down” when they knew something wasn’t right. This started off a huge radical change.
While most laws are in place with good reason, there have been some that were ridiculous. In these cases, I believe it is right to disobey a law in order to make a change, such as Plessy did.
It was a courageous act Homer Plessy took to make a stand. What I also found interesting was the article’s comment on Edward White, and I agree how it’s baffling that he was not excluded!
I remember learning about Plessy vs Ferguson in school when I was younger, but I never knew that Plessy was only partially African American. Not that it should matter, discrimination is terrible no matter what.
I think it is dumb that Edward White which is apart of some type of white supremacy group, is able to be on the supreme justice.
The Plessy vs Ferguson case was one that was taught a lot about in school but I do not recall knowing that Plessy was only partial African American. It is interesting to think about whether it is alright to break the law in certain cases because you usually want to say no because it is the law and then you remember things like this and it makes you really think.
I thought it was interesting that Edward white was not excluded despite his beliefs. I also did not know that Plessy was only half African American. That’s one of the major cases we read about in high school.
Over the years I have learned about separate but equal. It seems like such a distant concept when in reality, people in our country still struggle with feelings of racial injustice and protests push legal limits.
I have learned about this case many times throughout my educational background. However, this article contains new facts that are not in all history books such as the term octoroon and Edwards beliefs. I think these details being deleted out of summaries of this case is unethical.
It’s amazing to see how courageous people like Rosa Parks are and to see how dedicated they were to fighting for their rights. I have learned about this case many times throughout my life but this article has even more facts that I didn’t know. It did a lot for schools and it is very unethical that details were deleted from the case
I have heard and learned about his case multiple times and the one thing that I always find extremely interesting and get stuck over is that Plessy was in fact 1/8 African American and 7/8 White but was still considered an African American in this case.
I love reading about successful movements that worked towards equality. Everyone should be treated equally no matter the color of their skin
I can not believe that I have never heard about this because of how outrageous this was for him to be prosecuted.
I have previously learned about this influential case, & it is amazing to think back to when problems like equality were so apparent in society. It’s amazing how far we have come with equality since then, but I think we have a long ways to go.
Today, if one wrong phrase is said, people are automatically jumping to the conclusion of things like racism. It is crazy to think that a white supremacist that outspoken would even get close to a chair of power.
I have learned about this throughout my years of schooling. I enjoy be able to look back and see how far we have come. Even though some things like this still happen in todays time.
Historically, the best way to protest a law is through peaceful protests. Refusing to get up from a white’s only area counts as this and has been proven effective through the civil rights movement.
I agree how can someone hear a case who is affiliated with a white supremacist group when the case is involving a racial issues. I guess a conflict of interest didn’t matter back in the day.