Resultado de búsqueda
Separate but equal, the legal doctrine that once allowed for racial segregation in the United States. The doctrine held that so long as segregation laws affected white and Black people equally, those laws did not violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S.
Separate but equal was a legal doctrine in United States constitutional law, according to which racial segregation did not necessarily violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which nominally guaranteed "equal protection" under the law to all people.
29 de oct. de 2009 · Ferguson was a landmark 1896 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation under the “separate but equal” doctrine. The case stemmed from an 1892...
Separate but equal (en castellano: Separados pero iguales) fue una doctrina jurídica del Derecho constitucional de Estados Unidos que justificaba y permitía la segregación racial, entendiendo que no suponía una violación de la decimocuarta enmienda de la constitución estadounidense, garantía de la igual protección de las ...
“Separate but equal” refers to the infamously racist decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) that allowed the use of segregation laws by states and local governments. The phrase “separate but equal” comes from part of the Court’s decision that argued separate rail cars for whites and African Americans were ...
In the Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans, Tourgée argued that the law requiring “separate but equal accommodations” was unconstitutional. When Judge John H. Ferguson ruled against him, Plessy applied to the State Supreme Court for a writ of prohibition and certiorari.
4 de ene. de 2022 · EXPLAINER. Plessy v. Ferguson aimed to end segregation—but codified it instead. The Supreme Court’s infamous “separate but equal” ruling in 1896 stemmed from Homer Plessy’s pioneering act...
