Teachers' Domain®
 

Organization:

Forgot Your Password?

Not yet registered?

Register now to download, share, and save resources. It's simple, safe, and free! Learn More

You are now "Test Driving" Teachers' Domain

You may view up to 7 resources in this limited trial period.

You have 6 views remaining. Register now for unlimited free access and to download, share, and save resources. Learn More

About Registration:

Registering with Teachers' Domain is free and allows you to:

  • • View as many resources as you like
  • • Save, sort, and share resources using My Folders and My Groups
  • • Download resources to your desktop
  • • See standards correlations for your state

Thank you for "Test Driving" Teachers' Domain

You have viewed all seven resources permitted in this limited trial period. You may continue to browse the site, but to view, download, share, and save resources, you must register now. Registration is simple, safe, and free.

For more information:

Learn about our online Professional Development Courses, or review our Privacy Policy.

If you still have questions, please contact us.

NSDLNSDL users sign in here

Recommended for: Grades 6-12

Resource: Documenting Brown 2: Plessy v. Ferguson

Media Type:
PDF Document

Size: 93.8 KB

In the mid-1920s, a Chinese American man named Gong Lum sued the local school board when his daughter, Martha, was denied admission to her local school because of her race. When the case went before the Supreme Court in 1927, Gong Lum lost. The Court affirmed that segregated schools for Chinese Americans did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.

Also available from the "Brown Reactions" series:

  • The Fourteenth Amendment
  • Plessy v. Ferguson
  • Mendez v. Westminster
  • Brown v. Board of Education, 1954
  • Brown v. Board of Education, 1955
  • Civil Rights Act of 1964
  • Collected Excerpts
  •  

    Teachers' Domain, Documenting Brown 2: Plessy v. Ferguson, published December 22, 2004, retrieved on ,
    http://www.teachersdomain.org/resource/osi04.soc.ush.civil.plessy/

    In the years following the Civil War, Reconstruction-era legislation granted African Americans citizenship, equal protection under the law, and, for black males, the right to vote. For nearly a decade, former slaves enjoyed unprecedented freedom until the controversial presidential election of Rutherford B. Hayes and the Compromise of 1877 effectively ended the era of Reconstruction.

    During the 1880s and 1890s, southern states, where 90 percent of African Americans lived, enacted laws designed to dismantle Reconstruction and restore white supremacy and control. These included segregation ordinances, which mandated separate public accommodations for the races, and changes to their constitutions to restrict, and then systematically disenfranchise, black male voters.

    On June 7, 1892, a biracial man named Homer Plessy was forcibly removed from the "For Whites" car of the East Louisiana Railroad and jailed. His arrest was part of a planned action by the Citizens' Committee to Test the Constitutionality of the Separate Car Act. According to the 1890 Louisiana Separate Car Act, Plessy was required to sit in a car designated for "colored" persons, although, as he asserted, he was seven-eighths Caucasian and one-eighth Negro.

    Plessy took his case to court, arguing that the Louisiana Separate Car Act violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments and was thus unconstitutional -- that separating the races implied involuntary servitude and inferiority rather than equality. New Orleans trial judge John H. Ferguson ruled against Plessy, affirming that Louisiana could choose to impose the Separate Car Act on trains that operated within the state.

    Plessy appealed his case to the Louisiana Supreme Court, which upheld Ferguson's decision. He then appealed to the United States Supreme Court. On May 18, 1896, the Court ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson that the Separate Car Act was not in conflict with the Thirteenth Amendment, and that separate train cars did not imply involuntary servitude. The Court also ruled that the Separate Car Act did not violate equal protection provided by the Fourteenth Amendment, as long as separate accommodations were equal. The lone dissenter in the case, Justice John Harlan, argued that separate accommodations did imply a separate class status for blacks and that "our U.S. Constitution is color-blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens."

    The decision provided the foundation for state and local governments in the South and in other states to legally segregate the races in most spheres of public life, including transportation, public accommodations, and public schools. The Fourteenth Amendment now had limited impact, and with the rise of white supremacist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, segregation and discrimination were often enforced with violence and intimidation.

    Resource Produced by:

    WGBH Educational Foundation

    Collection Developed by:

    WGBH Educational Foundation

    Collection Credits

    Collection Funded by:

    Open Society Institute