Case brief summary
A state law requiring separate but supposedly equal facilities for different races does not violate the Constitution.
Facts
Plessy, who was mostly white but had some Black ancestry, sat in a whites only train car in Louisiana and refused to move to the car set aside for Black passengers.
Procedural history
Plessy was criminally charged under a Louisiana law requiring separate train cars by race, argued the law was unconstitutional, lost in the trial court and the Louisiana Supreme Court, and appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Issue
Does a state law requiring railroads to provide separate but equal train cars for white and Black passengers violate the Thirteenth or Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution?
Holding
The Supreme Court held that the Louisiana law requiring separate but equal railway cars for white and Black passengers was constitutional.
Reasoning
The Court said the slavery ban didn't apply here, equal protection only requires equal treatment under law, and separating races by custom was a reasonable state power, not a sign of inferiority.
Opinions
Majority (Brown): The Court held that requiring separate but equal train cars for different races does not violate the Constitution because equal facilities satisfy equal protection and separation itself does not imply inferiority.
Dissent (Harlan): Harlan argued the Constitution is colorblind, that forced racial separation on public transportation is a badge of inferiority, and the law violates true equality before the law.