Moot Court - Plessy v. Ferguson

On Wednesday, October 11th, two litigation teams went to battle in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson. Before the teams delivered their arguments, some agreed upon facts of the case were laid out:

1) Homer Plessy was an octoroon, an African American male with 1/8th black blood who had very fair skin and was often mistaken for a white man

2) He bought a 1st class train ticket, knowingly violating a state statute. There were separate accommodations for white and black passengers.

The defining question of the case was:

Did fining Plessy for boarding a first class train violate his 14th amendment rights? I.e does a state law requiring the separation of races violate the 14th amendment?

Homer A. Plessy

The first team spoke in support of Plessy. Their first speaker demanded that the court set a precedent that African Americans should have the same rights as White Americans. Another argument their team presented appealed to our Christian sensibilities. They pointed out that all sins are of equal weight, that god created us in his own image, and that people of all skin colors should be treated the same.

The first team's most interesting argument came at the end. They reminded us that Mr. Plessy is only 1/8th African American and questioned if the Jim Crow laws should even apply to him. After this they declared that all Jim Crow Laws should be struck down because according to the constitution, there is no superior race. Lastly, the court asked the question, "how can he live up to this law with his mixed heritage? Should he remove an arm and leave it on the black car?"

John H. Ferguson

The second litigation team to speak had enormous variety to their arguments. They included the fact that separate IS equal in this case, that Plessy knowingly broke the law, and that if Blacks were allowed in the White cars, then Whites may stop using the railroad. This loss of business would violate their liberty interest and prevent them from conducting their business as they wish.

Legal arguments also came out. They argued that on a close reading of the 14th amendment it says nothing about integrating races and that as long as an individuals rights are not being prescribed than it is fine. They also argued that the 14th amendment only guarantees individual rights, and that there is nothing stopping blacks from boarding the train and getting where they need to go.

The last few arguments stated that it would be unprecedented for the court to strike down these statutes. The team claimed that these laws were not creating any hardship for Blacks and that the Federal Court should not reach down to the state level and interfere with how states regulate daily life.

The judge aired on the side of judicial restraint and practiced Stare Decisis by ruling against Plessy.

He stated that it is persuasive that there is no precedent to strike down the law, and that the federal court is not in the business of reaching down to state level and interfering with state politics. He also commended the idea that a strict and close reading of the 14th amendment can find NOTHING that that demands integration, only respect of an individual’s rights.

More info about the case can be found here.

#Plessy #Ferguson #SeparatebutEqual