Facts of the case
The state of Louisiana enacted a law that required separate railway cars for blacks and whites. In 1892, Homer Adolph Plessy--who was seven-eighths Caucasian--took a seat in a "whites only" car of a Louisiana train. He refused to move to the car reserved for blacks and was arrested.
Question
Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusion
-
7–1 decision for Ferguson
Equal but separate accommodations for whites and blacks imposed by Louisiana do not violate the the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Henry B. Brown Brown 
Melville W. Fuller Fuller 
Stephen J. Field Field 
Horace Gray Gray 
George Shiras, Jr. Shiras 
Edward D. White White 
Rufus Peckham Peckham 
John M. Harlan Harlan 
David J. Brewer Brewer
No, the state law is within constitutional boundaries. The majority, in an opinion authored by Justice Henry Billings Brown, upheld state-imposed racial segregation. The justices based their decision on the separate-but-equal doctrine, that separate facilities for blacks and whites satisfied the Fourteenth Amendment so long as they were equal. (The phrase, "separate but equal" was not part of the opinion.) Justice Brown conceded that the 14th amendment intended to establish absolute equality for the races before the law. But Brown noted that "in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races unsatisfactory to either." In short, segregation does not in itself constitute unlawful discrimination.
