Plessy v. Ferguson Mock Trial

The Plessy v. Ferguson trial occurred because Homer Plessy sued because he believed the law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment. Railroad companies forced whites and blacks to not only sit in separate cars, but also did not allow blacks to purchase a first-class ticket.

The team that argued in favor of Plessy argued that the Louisiana Car Act 1892 denied equal rights. They stated that because the 14th amendment says that all people born or naturalized in the United States are citizens. Also, Plessy was indistinguishable based on his skin color because he was majority white but had 1/8 African American decent. Taking a religious approach, they argued that the Bible is against separate but equal and we are all God's children. They also took an interesting economic argument stating that it was wasteful to have separate restrooms, water fountains, and schools built. It was would also cause a burden to railroad companies to have to forfeit tickets because of race.

Arguments against Plessy stated that their are separate accommodations that are made for each race and that laws are made to protect public safety. They argued that it would cause less conflict for both races to be separated. They also stated that it is Plessy's fault that he was not following the law that Louisiana made. Everyone was to be on the same legal platform and not social and Plessy's case was viewed as a social issue. They also argued that each state is free and should be allowed to experiment on their own. All and all both teams presented a very strong argument. If i had to pick which one was stronger, it would be the argument in favor of Plessy because it took many different approaches with differing ideas.