Why does the Supreme Court feel that the “separate but equal” doctrine does not violate the 14th Amendment?

1 answer:

3 0

The Supreme Court felt that the "separate but equal" doctrine didn't violate the 14th Amendment because they believed that both blacks and whites were being treated equally despite being separate. The 14th Amendment gave American citizenship to all African Americans, this included former slaves. This means that the government must give all American citizens the same rights, equal protection, and due process.

The Brown v. Board of Education case proved that the "separate but equal" doctrine was false. This was where a young African American girl had to walk a long way to her black school, while there was a white school very close to her home. This was an obvious problem and proved that "separate but equal" was not equal at all. Eventually, this case ended segregation in public schools. The Plessy v. Ferguson case also proved this, but the Supreme Court tried to justify the "separate but equal" doctrine by saying how blacks and whites have the same equal facilities.

You might be interested in

Which accurately describes a chart developed 20 years after a historical event

Anettt [7]

effective secondary source document

3 0

3 years ago

Theodore Roosevelt progressive party appeal to some Republicans and others who want to change reform. Select true or false

svetlana [45]

Theodore Roosevelt's Progress party appealed to some republicans and others who wanted change and reform. So the answer is True.

Hope this helps :D.

4 0

3 years ago

Separation of powers means that A) the House and Senate may never pass joint resolutions on foreign policy issues. B) the nation

Ahat [919]

D) the legislative, executive and judicial functions of government are held by separate people and groups

6 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What was the purpose of direct democracy in ancient Greece?

yKpoI14uk [10]

To allow people to follow the athenians model

7 0

3 years ago

Many justices are famous for the wins and majority decisions, such as Earl Warren and Brown v. Board of Education and Harry Blac

jonny [76]

Answer:

The answer is below

Explanation:

Dissent in law is a term that describes an opinion in a lawsuit composed by one or more judges indicating their difference with the opinion of the majority during the makings of a court decision.

Hence, dissent often attempts to appeal to better judgment, its power lies in its influence in subsequent but related cases.

This implies that dissent influence the people outside law courts, and often times, charges civil societies or movement to seek changes in constitution or perception relating to similar outcomes where there was a dissent. For example Louis Brandeis’s 1928 dissent in Olmstead v. United States.

Therefore, the power of dissent is the ability to sway the public opinion, charge civil societies and movement, and possibly the change the outcome of a court decision and constitution in the future years.

3 0

3 years ago