Plessy v. Ferguson Reax.

      In the courtroom today, the case of Plessy v. Ferguson was heard and was of great importance in our government system. Homer Plessy was a mixed-race man who purchased a first-class ticket for a train in New Orleans, Louisiana. Plessy then boarded the designated white only car leading to the authorities being reported on him and him being arrested in an alleged rough way. Plessy was then charged under the Louisiana Separate Car Act of 1890. Now that is where we stand today, Homer Plessy is being accused of a crime for his actions under the state of Louisiana by Judge John Howard Ferguson as the United States Supreme Court will hear Plessy's argument. 

The attorneys of Plessy commenced their argument by detailing the history of segregation in America and how it still affects the criminal justice system of our nation. The Jim Crow Laws were the basis of their argument as in 1896, they still were heavily enforced in the United States. This argument led to the question "Why are we clinging to unjust regulations of the past?" being asked. These unjust regulations spoken of are highlighted by the Jim Crow Laws along with the Black Codes that held a stronghold on state and local governments. 

   Plessy himself argued that he was only one-eighth of an African American, meaning he should not be deemed a colored man when the majority of his ancestors and family were white. However, in Plessy's argument as well, man is the same besides the color of their skin, and it is only just for us to see man beyond the color of their skin for who they truly are. In a less personal manner, Plessy's side argued from the Declaration of Independence and how it details that "all men are created equal" and be endowed with "certain unalienable rights". Adding on to their argument, the attorneys detailed that segregation was solely based on race with state law intending to segregate the United States and its communities based on race. This argument highlighted the separate but equal doctrine that whites and blacks were completely separate and still were not equally provided for. For example, the newer, more expensive train cars are designated for whites, and the significantly older and beat-down train cars are designated for the colored. Why designate certain allocations of resources to one race when African Americans have worked to provide for the American economy and segregation is a costly institution in our economy? Plessy's attorneys left us with their final thoughts that it is required to allocate more resources to African Americans to improve their way of life to establish a more equal playing field for all.

    On the flip side, Ferguson and his attorneys filed a strong argument to support the state of Louisiana's actions towards Mr. Plessy. Highlighted in their argument was the fact the separate but equal doctrine provided to all individuals regardless of their race does not suggest the inferiority of race. "The state constitution is fundamentally sound and must not be challenged" argued the attorneys of Judge Ferguson. In essence, the argument being made was based on the laws established in the past were already set in stone and had no loopholes or problems with them. Another argument made along with the separate but equal doctrine was that eliminating segregation was not the best solution for society at least not right then. Segregation had been around for years before this case and there was no massive hole in the American society or economy so why fix what isn't broken? It is in fact, not hurting either race with African Americans building high-standing communities like those in Galveston, Texas while being segregated.

    Upon hearing the arguments of both sides, the court decided to rule in favor of Mr. Plessy as it was deemed the state of Louisiana forced separation with a bias against African Americans. The court emphasized that African Americans did not demand direct equality with whites, they just demanded better living conditions and rights under the separate but equal doctrine. Therefore, there was no argument to overturn the history of segregation that the United States had held for many years, as described in the Ferguson side's argument. Just an argument to shift state and local government's ways of perception and treatment of African Americans leading to a ruling in favor of Mr. Plessy.