Plessy v Ferguson Moot Court

I felt as though the ruling in this case showed a perfect example of how long it can take to change the social biases of a certain society, not matter what the rules say or what law has been recently passed. One could assume that upon the ratification of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment, there would be opposition to the new rules set forth. This is evident in many events right after ratification straight up until the civil rights movement. This case shows just how differently one can interpret the constitution. Having a certain ego about ones race can change the way you read these amendments. Reading them with the assumption that whites are still superior, even though the constitution does not distinguish anyone in such a way to hold one race above others, that these rights given to the black citizens are absolute and true to the wording, with no extra or deeper meaning. In other words, as long as they weren't enslaved or denied the right to vote, it was all still fair game. Being that Homer Plessy was denied rights that had nothing to do with these specific instances, the majority of the court ruled in favor of the state. Granted I will say that it is much easier to see such a horrendous mistake with the mindset of true equality. One who thinks in this way will recognize that we must all have rights that go beyond what is stated in the constitution in order for our society to progress and function, and in order for the members to feel as though they are treated fairly.