Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

Fourteenth Amendment v. Tenth Amendment: Federalism

The arguments presented to the Supreme Court of the United States in Plessy v. Ferguson involve two competing amendments to the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment says states may not deny people equal protection of the law and the Tenth Amendment reserves broad, undefined powers (often referred to as police powers) for the states.

Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
 

Tenth Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
 

Plessy argued that by restricting him to a separate train car, the State of Louisiana violated his Fourteenth Amendment right. However, the State of Louisiana countered that it had the power under the Tenth Amendment to create laws that preserve order and public peace.

Explain the two positions.

Read the Supreme Court's opinion.

Resources
About landmarkcases.org
 
Teaching Recommendations
Based on Your Time

 
Background Summary
and Questions

• • •
Reading Level
• •
Reading Level
 •
Reading Level
Diagram of How the Case Moved Through the Court System
 
Key Excerpts from the Majority Opinion
 
Key Excerpts from the Dissenting Opinion
  
Full Text of the Majority Opinion

back to top

Activities
    The Case
Reinforcing the Case Facts With a Cartoon

Does Treating People Equally Mean Treating Them the Same?
 

Fourteenth Amendment vs.
Tenth Amendment:
Federalism

 

Interpreting the Constitution
 

back to top

    After the Case
The Impact of the Case: Separate But Equal
 

How a Dissent Can Presage a Ruling
 

Case Study of Integration -- Little Rock
 

back to top

Back to top


  FindLaw  
 

LEGAL WEB AND DATABASE SEARCH