Question

Read the following excerpt from the 1896 Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson. "The object of the [Fourteenth] amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, but, in the nature of things, it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political, equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to either. Laws permitting, and even requiring, their separation in places where they are liable to be brought into contact do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other, and have been generally, if not universally recognized as within the competency of the state legislatures in the exercise of their police power. The most common instance of this is connected with the establishment of separate schools for white and colored children…"

What was the intended effect of this reasoning?

Answer 1

The intended effect of the reasoning in the Plessy v. Ferguson case was to uphold the doctrine of 'separate but equal,' allowing racial segregation as long as both races were treated equally.

Step-by-step explanation:

The intended effect of the reasoning in the Plessy v. Ferguson case was to uphold the doctrine of "separate but equal." The Supreme Court ruled that racial segregation is constitutional as long as both races are treated equally. This decision gave legal and constitutional protection to race-based discrimination and supported the prevailing attitudes of the time.

Answer 2

The Supreme Court's decision in Plessy v. Ferguson intended to constitutionally justify 'separate but equal' facilities, allowing de jure segregation in public accommodations as long as the separate facilities for different races were deemed equal.

Step-by-step explanation:

The intended effect of the reasoning in the Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson was to provide a constitutional basis for separate but equal facilities for different races, effectively legitimizing segregation.

The Court argued that the Fourteenth Amendment mandated equality before the law, but not necessarily the abolition of racial distinctions in social settings.

The decision allowed states to enforce segregation as long as the separate facilities provided to each race were considered equal, although in practice, these facilities were rarely, if ever, truly equal.