What Is The Case Of Plessy V. Ferguson

A poignant question that has been raised throughout American society since the constitution was written is should it be the responsibility of the law to change society or to protect the original intent of the country’s forefathers? The challenge with the original document is it left out everyone that was not a white male, meaning women and people of color. With regards to civil rights and liberties, the law should accommodate the needs of a society rather than dominate a select group or groups of people due to an existing standard of racial oppression.
One of the difficulties regarding the Plessy vs. Ferguson case was the fact that southern whites were still not willing to view African Americans as equals because it threatened their belief
system as a whole. Most white southerners maintained the idea that no matter their place in society, blacks (and people of blended descent) would always be inferior. This attitude was challenged when African Americans gained access to voting and higher education, which allowed them to pursue careers in elite fields such as law and medicine. John Tyler Morgan, a known white supremacist in the South, was the epitome of this fear presented by white southerners who felt the need to deprive African Americans of their civil rights. As Morgan stated, “the negroes have uniformly used the ballot as a means of inflicting the penalties of resentment and race animosity upon southern people” (Morgan 72). Morgan’s article represents the fear of retaliation, he felt the blacks would inflict upon white people, which scared him and so many others so badly that they had to suppress them both in the laws and society. In a way, Morgan reinforces the idea that laws should shape society (or rather to continue to favor the majority). Through his support of denying African Americans rights within the law, he shows how faulty laws at the time were giving everyone equal rights rather than “equal opportunity.” This fallacy presented by Morgan shows the underlying ignorance, feelings of white supremacy and continued prejudice against African Americans.
Another exemplification of the superiority complex displayed by white southerners is Frederick L. Hoffman’s book Race Traits. It is a pseudo-scientific statistical analysis of racial interbreeding. One of the arguments in this document is the necessity of laws mandating segregation which would prevent harmful interracial sexual contact. As stated in his book, “the children of colored women and white men, of whatever shade of color, are morally and physically the inferiors of the pure black…the table clearly proves that there is an increase in brain weight with an increase in the proportion of white blood” (Hoffman 81-84). These statements directly imply that white is the superior race and that white people intellectually dominate African Americans. This book attracted many to believe its teachings due to the use of statistics. It also covers the tracks of the justices that held the Louisiana Law as just because Plessy was 7/8th white (which was still inferior). The race amalgamation argument presented by Hoffman justifies John Tyler Morgan’s and many white southerners view with regards to the inferiority of blacks in the United States.
Because of the fear that blacks would acquire power and social standing in the South, laws such as the Louisiana Law, specifically in this case regarding transportation, were enacted to keep African Americans “in their place.” There were differing views about education for African Americans, even within the community, however, W.E.B DuBois presented an argument for African Americans to rise up, get educated and acquire higher paying jobs.
He argued that blacks being able to advance themselves in society would eventually change the social laws. As he stated after the ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson, “He simply wishes to make it possible for a man to be both Negro and American without being cursed and spit upon by his fellows, without losing the opportunity of self-development” (DuBois 144). DuBois’ views differed greatly from Morgan’s and Hoffman’s due to DuBois’ desire to see African Americans be given the same rights and protection under the law. DuBois’ argument presents a clear principle that the ruling from the Supreme Court was unjust and that laws should change to improve and protect the rights of its populace. The ruling from Plessy v. Ferguson essentially set a legal precedent of African Americans being second-class citizens for several generations
thereafter.
The fourteenth amendment to the constitution was vaguely written so the “equal opportunity” presented as being an American citizen would be enough for these recently freedmen.
Equal opportunity does not equate equal rights. The ruling from the Supreme Court stating that facilities must be “separate but equal” became a mask to hide the underlying racial turmoil. A potential explanation for this decision may have been to avert the backlash that would have come with letting African Americans ride in integrated train cars. Being given an equal opportunity does not take into account the social backgrounds of the people involved. An equal opportunity is futile if there is systematic oppression and loopholes within these laws. Being forced to ride in an unfurnished train car, for example, compared to one with comfortable seating, lights, etc., limits civil liberties and prolongs the image of inferiority associated with African Americans. Seven learned justices exemplified the image that the South (or the entire United States) was not ready to swiftly change its belief system wholeheartedly. The 7-1 decision favoring the Louisiana Law showed the flaws in the wording of the 14th Amendment which allowed an interpretation of the amendment to continue the cycle of segregation in the South for years to
come.