Plessy Vs Ferguson Analysis

History generally gives us the ability to make important distinctions between complicated issues that arise throughout time. In particular, there were two monumental cases that brings about change in perspective. Plessy v. Ferguson and Bradwell v. Louisiana both indulge in constitutional debates that shaped our current perspectives. Plessy v. Ferguson case reiterated the separate but equal clause, that the constitution is "color-blind," and that the facilities as long as they were equal, can be separate. In Bradwell v. Illonois. It is clear that there are legal, social, and cultural perspectives influencing the decision of these Supreme Court cases. These two sources adamantly summarize the opinion of that time period, however that time period is both unconstitutional, as well as inhumane. The legal ramifications of being a slave, a child or loved one of a slave, and associated with a slave, are simply inhumane. Retracting the rights of …show more content…
Ferguson, the court deemed "absolute equality of the two races before the law" (Foner and Garraty, 1991). The political agenda tried to generalize the concept of equality, claiming that there is equality here when in fact there was not. The clear indication is that history repeated itself, and continued to do so up until segregation in the 1960s. In the Plessy vs. Ferguson case, Brian Duigan a writer for britannica.com delves into the opinion of John Marshall Harlan, whom insisted that this was an unconstitutional act. Harlan was the vote against, and explained his rationale. He recalled the Separate Car Act as an example that was correlated with the current case. He argued that the law is meant to interfere with the personal liberty and freedom of both races, however he attributed the liberties of African Americans being violated, as it had happened in the past. It was essential that the Constitution should take no account of a man's "surroundings or color" when his civil rights should be guaranteed