Plessy vs Ferguson was the court case that supported Jim Crow laws stating that "seperate but equal" was constitutional.
I think it was Plessy vs Ferguson
No. Plessy didn't have a trial in the US Supreme Court; they heard an appeal of his case. After the Court made its decision, Homer Plessy was rearrested for the original "offense" on January 11, 1897 (according to a New Orleans warrant) and paid a $25 fine, but was not sent to jail.More InformationThe Supreme Court considered Plessy v. Ferguson, (1896) under its appellate jurisdiction, meaning they reviewed the decisions of the lower courts on appeal, to ensure the Constitution was being upheld, but did not conduct a trial or rule on Plessy's guilt or innocence. By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, the issue under consideration was whether the Louisiana Separate Car Act that required racial segregation in railroad transportation violated the 13th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution.Homer Plessy's trial was before Judge John Ferguson (the Ferguson named in the case) in the Criminal District Court for Orleans Parish. Plessy refused to enter a plea, arguing instead that the Separate Car Act was null and void because it violated his constitutional rights under the 13th and 14th Amendments. He was found guilty without entering a plea.Plessy's attorney then appealed and filed for a writ of prohibition (an order from a higher court to a lower court preventing the court from exercising its jurisdiction) in the Criminal Court of Appeals, then in the Louisiana Supreme Court, and finally in the Supreme Court of the United States.Homer Plessy didn't actually enter a "guilty" plea until January 11, 1897, more than four months after the Supreme Court ruled on his case.Homer Plessy was rearrested for the original "offense" on January 11, 1897, according to a New Orleans warrant, and paid a $25 fine, but was never sent to jail.Case Citation:Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 US 537 (1896)
Plessy v. Ferguson.
"Seperate but Equal", from the case Plessy vs. Ferguson.
The Court rejected Plessy's arguments based on the Fourteenth Amendment, seeing no way in which the Louisiana statute violated it.
the Court rejected Plessy's arguments based on the Fourteenth Amendment, seeing no way in which the Louisiana statute violated it .segregation was supported by the Jim crow laws Delegation of rasict everywhere for example schools hospital and drinking fountain many more etc.
In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, Plessy's legal team argued that Louisiana's Separate Car Act, which required racial segregation on trains, violated the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. They contended that the law denied Plessy equal protection under the law, as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court rejected this argument and upheld the constitutionality of "separate but equal" racial segregation.
In the Plessy decision, the Supreme Court ruled that such segregation did not violate the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
The Supreme Court rejected Homer Plessy's argument that the Louisiana law stigmatized blacks as inferior, so they believed the law in no way violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
Plessy v. Ferguson
Plessy v. Ferguson
the Court rejected Plessy's arguments based on the Fourteenth Amendment, seeing no way in which the Louisiana statute violated it .segregation was supported by the Jim crow laws Delegation of rasict everywhere for example schools hospital and drinking fountain many more etc.
That would be the Supreme Court Case Plessy vs. Furgeson
It wasn't an amendment it was the term Separate but equal which was justified in supreme court case plessy v Ferguson
This is from the Supreme Court case Plessy vs. Ferguson.
Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 US 537 (1896)No. Plessy v. Ferguson was a US Supreme Court case that legally sanctioned racial segregation.