Plessy+v.+Ferguson

CONPlessy v. Ferguson In 1896, in the case Plessy v. Ferguson the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Louisiana's "Separate Car Act", which declared that blacks and whites must ride in separate railroad cars. Was the Separate Car Act: • Unconstitutional, because it violated the 13th and the 14th Amendments to the Constitution? (CON) • A legitimate use of Louisiana's police powers that did not violate either the 13th or the 14th Amendment? (PRO) CON: The separate car act violates the 14th amendment which guarantee's that people cannot be deprived of their liberty or property without "due to process of law". CON: This act also has no other purpose than to increase the servitude of the black race. CON: Even if the law requires separate accommodations for whites and blacks, it is unconstitutional just because of separate accommodations based on race as this is discriminatory. CON: Plessy has in fact been deprived from both his property and liberty. CON: Also Plessy, who was light skinned, was also deprived of his reputation of being someone who belonged in a dominant race.