preview

Supreme Mistakes: Blunders From The High Bench (Rough Draft

Better Essays

Supreme Mistakes: Blunders from the High Bench (Rough Draft Version)
Atop twenty-four Corinthian columns at One First Street in Washington, D.C., lie a promise to our nation, four words: “equal justice under law”. These words, abundant with virtuous intentions, are the parameters of jurisprudence that the Supreme Court must apply when considering its cases. A founding principle of this nation, seen in documents as early as the Declaration of Independence, and affirmed through the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution and the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments thereto, promotes the idea of equality in justice and blindness to the individuality of the litigant. This idea is central not only as a function …show more content…

Thus, the argument that the “lamentable times” led to the “lamentable decisions” (Lain, 1023) is largely invalid against these considerations.
A chiefly odious ruling was written in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson. Argued before the Court in 1896 and ultimately overruled by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, the Court, heard the case of a man named Plessy. One-eighths black, Plessy boarded a white-only car only which resulted in his arrest and jailing for violating of discriminatory segregationist statutes. The Court, under Justice Henry Billings Brown’s majority opinion, affirmed these segregationist policies establishing the infamous ‘separate but equal’ doctrine. As history would prove, the accommodations made for nonwhite Americans in many cases failed to even approach the threshold of equal. Plessy v. Ferguson stands in direct conflict with the promise of “equal justice under law”. With such a narrow interpretation of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, which in part provided for equal protection under law, the Court yielded great deference to a harsh sociopolitical environment, ultimately sanctioning the segregation that would defile the American dream for many years, until Brown v. Board. The only dissenter in this case, Chief Justice John Harlan’s now-canonic phrase “our Constitution is color-blind,” (Hutchison, 427) reminds us that, contrary to the idea of the majority in this

Get Access