What court case reversed plessy vs ferguson

Plessy 1

Plessy v. Ferguson and Miranda v. Arizona

Name

Class

Date

Professor

Plessy v. Ferguson and Miranda v. Arizona

Two landmark rulings made by the Supreme Court involve the cases of Plessy v. Ferguson and Miranda v. Arizona. In both rulings the impact to society was great with one resulting in the segregation of African American citizen for the next fifty years while the other affected the way law enforcement officers’ question and interrogate criminal offenders. While both of these cases occurred in two different centuries the ruling of the court had a direct impact on functions in American society and the rights of the individual citizen. In Plessy the rights of the African American where limited but in the case of Miranda individual rights were broadened.

Plessy vs. Ferguson

In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson the case began when an African American male who was half white and appeared white went against a Louisiana law that requires separate accommodations for separate races. Homer Plessy was a member of a group in New Orleans known as the Citizens Committee that fought for the equal right of the African American citizen. The Citizens Committee decided to test a Louisiana Law known as the 1890 Louisiana Separate Car Act. When Homer Plessy entered the train and took accommodations in the white section of the railcars he was detained by a police officer and held in a separate car until he was arrested upon exiting the train. Plessy was charged with breaching Louisiana Law and was jailed and fined.

On appeal the Louisiana Appeals Court ruled declared forced segregation in railroad cars traveling between states to be unconstitutional (Wolf, 2011). The case was then appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court that upheld the ruling of the district court and found the state had a right to establish laws that provide separate but equal accommodations. The case was then appealed for the last time when it went in front of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state and the laws concerning the segregation of the White and African American citizen was not addressed for over sixty years when the Supreme Courts ruling was reversed in the case of Brown vs. Board of Education.

When the Plessy case was brought in front of the Supreme Court by the defendant and the members of the Citizens Committee the claim was the defendant was denied his Fourteenth and Thirteenth Amendment rights. Plessy claimed that the 1890 Louisiana Separate Car Act violated his Thirteenth Amendment right against involuntary servitude. In other Plessy was claiming that by being forced into separate accommodations he was being placed in involuntary servitude. The court ruled that the Thirteenth Amendment did not apply to segregation so the defendants Thirteenth Amendment right could not have been violated.

Under the Fourteenth Amendment the defendant, Plessy, claimed he was denied the right to equal protection because the law violated his right to have the same privileges or immunities as any other American citizen as well as his right to life, liberty, and property. The Supreme Court found that the Fourteenth Amendment right of the African American was not violated by this statue because it did not violate the exclusive privilege right because it does not apply to race. The main purpose of the Amendment was to establish the citizenship of slaves and to define the privileges and protections of citizenship (Wolf, 2011).

The Supreme Court determined that though the African American race had been granted equality in political aspects of society they were not the social equal of the White American and are in fact an inferior race. Because African Americans are not as socially advanced as the White Americans a law requiring separate accommodations is constitutional. The court found as long as the accommodations that were provided to the two different races were equal they could be separate. The result was the ruling of the Louisiana Supreme Court held because the court found that neither the Thirteenth nor Fourteenth Amendment rights of the defendant were violated.

This case resulted in a vote of 8-1 with only one justice disagreeing with the ruling of the court. Justice John Marshall Harlan had the only dissenting opinion in the Plessy case which was ironic because he was a previous slave owner. While the majority found laws requiring the separation of the races simply reflected the culture of the people, in his dissenting opinion Justice Harlan legally forced segregation is unconstitutional (Zimmerman, 1997). Because the African American is legally segregated from White American society they will never gain the opportunity to become equal to White Americans in American society.

Justice Harlan also found that instead of following the discriminatory actions of society the Supreme Court should instead be color blind (Wolf, 2011). In order to be color blind the Supreme Court must recognize that equality does include race and separate but equal accommodations interferes with the personal freedoms of the African American. He found that if the African American race was granted political equality that society should recognize them as also being socially equal.

The political environment during the Plessy ruling in the 19th Century and the later Brown vs. Board ruling that reversed Plessy in the 20th century where night and day. During the 19th century African Americans did not have a voice and had no support from White Americans in society. By the time of the reversal of this decision not only did the African American have a larger voice they had the support of a large percentage of society set on change.

Through a large political movement African Americans were able to gain equality beginning with the desegregation of the races. Thanks to the ruling by the Supreme Court in Plessy African Americans were considered and treated as inferior members of society for over half of century and had to fight hard for the rest of the century to gain the same rights as the non-minority.

During the 19th Century it was extremely common for the African Americans to be treated with discriminations in American society. In an attempt to stop these discriminatory practices, African American professional formed organizations to fight these unequal practices. In most cases these organizations were unsuccessful in making any major changes during this time period. Because the Supreme Court rules both on precedent and the opinion of the majority of society any significant changes that would improve the African Americans social standing would not come until society no longer viewed the African American as inferior. The result of this ruling was a discriminatory social process for the African Americans.

Miranda vs. Arizona

In the case of Miranda vs. Arizona the way police officers investigated criminal cases forever changed. The case begins with Ernesto Miranda, a criminal defendant who was charged, arrested, and found guilty of the charge of kidnapping and raping a young woman. Following Ernesto’s arrest for raping the young woman, Miranda confessed to the crime after being interrogated by police for two hours but that at no time did police explain to the Mexican immigrant that he had certain rights (Gribben, 2009). After Ernesto was found guilty of the charges he appealed his case on the basis’s that he had not been warned of his Fifth Amendment right. While Miranda was found to be a violent criminal offender who stalked, kidnapped, and raped his victim his case forever impacted American society.

When Ernesto Miranda appealed his case to the Arizona Supreme Court the ruling was to uphold the guilty sentence even though the Supreme Court has recently set the precedent in Escobedo vs. Illinois concerning the questioning of a criminal suspect without first warning the offender they had a right to an attorney. The Arizona Supreme Court considered the Escobedo ruling but interpreted as saying the defendant must be asked and then denied the right to an attorney when in fact the ruling found law enforcement should make it clear to criminal suspects they have the right to have an attorney present during questioning. They found the police acted within the bounds of the law when questioning Miranda.

The defendant then appealed his case to the Supreme Court citing once again that his Fifth Amendment Rights had been violated but this time he had the power of the ACCLU to aid him through the process. In order to clarify the ruling in Escobedo the ACLU decided to support Miranda’s case. The ACVLU hired Miranda the best possible legal team and took the case in front of the Supreme Court. After reviewing the case the majority ruled in favor of Miranda. The court held that the prosecution may not use statements made by a person in police custody unless certain minimum procedural safeguards were in place (Mount, 2010).

In the ruling made by the majority of the justice of the Supreme Court found that Ernesto Miranda had not been informed of any of his rights by police before confessing to the crime and signing a written statement. The Supreme Court determined in order to provide the necessary checks on police the suspect should sign a waiver stating he was made aware of his right to an attorney and by signing the waiver has shown thy were warned of the right to counsel and have waived this right.

The Supreme Court also ruled that due to the intimidating aspects of the interrogation the suspect would be assured of his rights if the police were required to reads them their Miranda rights and the rights should include informing them of their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. Police do not have to read Miranda Warnings to witnesses of a crime or even offender that have been arrested and will not be interrogated.

The Supreme Court determined after addressing several cases including Escobedo that law enforcement has an obligation to warn criminal offenders of their right to have an attorney present during any police questioning and to remain silent. While many believe every time the police approach a person to ask them a question they should have their rights read. The Miranda Warning in fact only applies to situations were suspects are being held or interrogated by police concerning a crime they are suspected of committing.

In one dissent Justice White found the ruling was without merit because there was no constitutional wording that would guarantee a citizen the right to be warned of their due process rights. White found the court has overstepped its authority in not actually interpreting the constitution and instead making new constitutional law. The Justice found there was n basis in precedent as well as no basis in common law (Gribben, 2009). White warned the majority justices that this ruling would have a major impact on the criminal justice system and American society. Criminal offenders that are not properly warned will be allowed to get away with even the most violent of crimes and the consequences will impact all of American society.

The political climate during the Miranda Ruling was one of change and progress, Society was embroiled in a civil battle concerning the rights of the citizen and ensuring equality in justice. While in the ruling of Plessy society was also embroiled in a battle concerning the African American there was more social support during the 1960’s then there would have been in 1897. Society was not only fighting for the right of the African American but of the women and many other important causes. The due process rights of the citizen and the actions of the police where under intense scrutiny. In response to this scrutiny the Supreme Court ruled in favor of protecting the rights of the individual by policing the actions of the police.

If the same case had come before the Supreme Court in 1897 the results would not have been the same. During this time in society the focus was on protecting the rights of the White American and not the due process rights of the minority and rapist and kidnappers were sentenced to death with no thought of whether or not the police had informed them of the right to an attorney or to remain silent in order to avoid self-incrimination. Now if the Plessy case had come before the Supreme Court in 1966 there is no doubt the ruling of the Supreme Court would have been extremely different. African Americans would not have been deemed inferior social beings and segregation would not have been legally enforced.

While both cases impacted American society one had a negative impact while the other had a positive one. Plessy threatened the equal rights of the African American citizen as well as their right to life, liberty, and property. The ruling allowed for legal discrimination and denied the opportunity for the African American to succeed or become superior members of society. Miranda changed the way police approach the criminal investigation. While the ruling has caused extreme conflict in American society it has also created a check on the actions of the police and strengthened the citizen’s due process protections.

References

Gribben, M. (2009). Miranda vs. Arizona: The Crime That Changed American justice. Retrieved

August 7, 2011 from

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/miranda

Mount, S. (2010). The Miranda warning. Retrieved August 7, 2011 from

http://www.usconstitution.net/miranda.html

Wolf, K. (2011). Plessy v. Ferguson to Brown v. Board of Education: The Supreme Court Rules

on School Desegregation. Retrieved August 7, 2011 from

http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/pubs/A5/wolff.html

Zimmerman, T. (1997). Plessy vs. Ferguson. Retrieved August 7, 2011 from

http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/acs/1890s/plessy/plessy.html