Explain how the Supreme Court justified the practice of segregating railroad passengers in Louisiana by race.

The Supreme Court case of Plessy v Ferguson was a very important one. Homer Plessy, a black man, sued because he claimed his rights were violated. He felt he should be able to sit in any railroad car. The state court in Louisiana ruled that the concept of “separate but equal” was legal. It was acceptable for separate railroad cars, based on race, to exist in Louisiana.

This case was appealed to the Supreme Court....

The Supreme Court case of Plessy v Ferguson was a very important one. Homer Plessy, a black man, sued because he claimed his rights were violated. He felt he should be able to sit in any railroad car. The state court in Louisiana ruled that the concept of “separate but equal” was legal. It was acceptable for separate railroad cars, based on race, to exist in Louisiana.

This case was appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the state court. The Supreme Court ruled that the “separate but equal” concept did not violate Homer Plessy’s rights. The Supreme Court ruled that this concept didn’t conflict with the 13th amendment that banned slavery. The Supreme Court said separation of the races did not suggest that any race was legally better or more important than any other race. The Supreme Court believed the 14th amendment was designed to prevent people from from legal inequality, not social inequality. In this case, the Supreme Court felt that Homer Plessy was treated as legally equal and, therefore, found no violation of the equal protection clause.

This “separate but equal” concept remained in effect until it was overturned in the Brown v Board of Education case in 1954.