In continuation of our study on historical court cases, the class presented a mock trial of Brown v. Board of Education. In this trial, students took the famous consolidation case and presented separate sides in front of our acting judge, Professor Smith. In this equal protection case, a clear question was set: Is the state law mandating segregation in schools covered by the 14th amendment?
The first side to argue were those of Brown. The question first pitched was if two separate facilities based on race could actually be equal. Response statements included that with separation, one race would always be inferior to the other, calling out the flaws in Plessy v. Ferguson.
Other points made in favor of Brown were that having separate schools hurt the economy due to the lack of opportunities presented for blacks. Going along with the bashing of Plessy v. Ferguson, one student stated that while separate but equal may look good on paper, it is certainly the opposite in real-life.
Of course, the valuable point of stare decisis was quickly brought up by the side arguing for the State of Kansas. Presenters urged the judge to stand-by the decision already made in Plessy v. Ferguson. Other arguments acknowledged that inequality was still very real, but would get better as time progressed, and shouldn’t be dealt with brashly.
State decision was also a big plea by the Kansas side. The students felt that the matter should be a state choice, not one decided by the federal government. The thought that a number of different social classes were mixing was universally unliked. A compromise proposed by the state was to charge establishments that don’t follow separate but equal correctly but to keep the action in place.
Following all arguments, our judge found that separation was unconstitutional, thus overturning Plessy v. Ferguson. Looking through the lens of that time, I also agree with this call. A breakthrough was needed in this ongoing fight for equality, and African Americans got just that.
Sources: NOTES TAKEN IN CLASS