Mock Trial Plessy V. Ferguson Reaction

Plessy V. Ferguson Separate but Equal

Case Thoughts

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). It’s honestly shocking how a case built around such a clear violation of equal rights could shape racial segregation for decades. 

So, the story starts with Homer Plessy, a man who was only 1/8 Black, what they called an “octoroon” at the time. He bought a first-class train ticket in Louisiana — completely legal — but because of a state law that required segregated train cars, he was told to move. His refusal triggered a lawsuit based on the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. These history overviews by both sides were really informative making it clear to understand what was going on at this time. 

Equal Protection Clause Under 14th A.

Constitutional Fight 

From the very beginning, the law was violating its own principles: white only and Black only accommodations were clearly not equal. 

The state defended segregation by saying the facilities were equal and that this was a “legitimate exercise to promote the comfort of its people.” Which is a valid supported statement throughout this period. They argued that the law treated both races the same — just separately — and therefore didn’t break the Constitution . But how can anyone claim a group has equal rights while forcing them into a lesser space? 

Religion

Some people even tried to justify segregation through religion and ethics. They pointed out teachings like “God created man equal” or “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” yet still allowed racism to dictate public policy — a complete contradiction. Personally, I thought Plessy's argument about religion was really strong, proving the points, she needed to prove that targeted the state well. 

Economic POV.

Economically, segregation hurt society too. Louisiana risked losing skilled Black professionals — doctors, lawyers, business owners — which could damage international business and the state economy. Still, lawmakers insisted they had to cater to the comfort of white customers to avoid backlash. 

Robert V. City Of Boston

What makes this ruling even worse is that earlier cases like Roberts v. City of Boston had already upheld segregated schools, setting the stage for this disaster. I thought when the state brought up this argument, it was really powerful and persuasive. It was all about “stabilizing society” instead of forcing real integration. 

Plessy v. Ferguson didn’t just maintain racial separation — it legitimized inequality under the fake label of fairness. It shows how dangerous the law can become when society protects comfort over justice. And even today, its legacy still echoes — reminding us why equality can never be conditional. 

AI Disclosure: I had AI put my bullet point notes into sentences, then added my own thoughts, images and subheadings.