John Marshall Harlan

The Eros Lodge and the Eros Bar and Grill, under the scope of the law, are directly involved in interstate commerce. They are a public hotel and restaurant and open to both local citizens and citizens traveling from out of state. While their clientele may consist primarily of locals, it does not mean that out-of-state travels cannot or would not stay there. Mr. Bates, the owner, did not say he didn’t rent to travelers from out of state, he only said he wouldn’t rent to same-sex couples. However,

allowed to purchase the train ticket, he could not ride a train cart because segregation would not allow him. This also shows that segregation can cause one innocent man to be arrested, violating his Constitutional rights. In addition, “Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote an explanation of his dissenting vote, explaining how white Americans saw themselves in a position of power even if they were technically “equal” with the others” (Source C). This shows that whites thought that they were more powerful

The case involving Homer Plessy, who was brought before Judge John H. Ferguson of the Criminal Court in New Orleans originated in 1892 as a challenge to Louisiana’s Separate Car Act of 1890. The law required that all railroads operating in the state of Louisiana provide equal but separate accommodations for white and African American passengers and prohibited passengers from entering accommodations other than those to which they had been assigned on the basis of their race. It banned whites from

white children. Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education were both taken to court, because of the inequality of racial segregation. First and foremost, with the separation of races the superior race had more privileges. According to John Marshall Harlan, "...colored citizens are so inferior and degraded that they cannot be allowed to sit in public coaches occupied by white citizens." So, given this statement how is this equal? Having equality means you are treated the way your peers are despise

PLESSY V. FERGUSON The case between Homer Plessy and Judge John H. Ferguson began when “Louisiana enacted the Separate Car Act, which required separate railway cars for blacks and whites,” according to the article “Plessy v. Ferguson” by Oyez. Plessy’s reaction towards this act was to challenge it. Encyclopedia Britannica’s article “Plessy v. Ferguson” states that, like Plessy, there was “a group of Creole professionals in New Orleans [who] formed the Citizens’ Committee to Test the Constitutionality

restraint”. His ideology preferred judicial matters to be solved within congress and the states. Frankfurter believed that relying too much on judges would hinder the freedoms of the people and corrupt the nation’s concept of democracy. Justice John Marshall

Plessy v. Ferguson The case involving Homer Plessy, who was brought before Judge John H. Ferguson of the Criminal Court in New Orleans originated in 1892 as a challenge to Louisiana’s Separate Car Act of 1890. The law required that all railroads operating in the state of Louisiana provide equal but separate accommodations for white and African American passengers and prohibited passengers from entering accommodations other than those to which they had been assigned on the basis of their race. It

Maximiliano Sanchez Victoria Professor Linda Holt Comprehensive Law Studies 3 October 2017 Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education Picture this: a world with no color. Would racism still exist? Or would people be discriminated based on other things such as height, weight, or the sound of their voice? We may never know the answer to these questions. Racism is still alive in the United States, but it is not as severe and oppressive as it was during the era of the Jim Crow laws. The 13th

were becoming increasingly aware. The psychological and social disruptions created by the idea of an inferior status were tragic and detrimental to the academic motivation and overall development of many students of color (transcript). Justice John H. Marshall, the lead attorney for this case, gathered evidence from thirty social scientists about the negative effects of segregation (National Archives). These developmental scientists provided the main arguments that generated the idea of viewing education

Topeka Board of Education on behalf of their twenty children. Oliver Brown who was a minister, was the first parent to suit against the problem, so the case came to be named after his last name. Three local lawyers, Charles Bledsoe, Charles Scott and John Scott, were assisted by Robert Carter and Jack Greenberg from the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Oliver Brown had declared that Topeka 's racial segregation violated the Constitution 's Equal Protection Clause because the city 's black and