Countering SegregationImagine living in a country governed by segregation laws. In 1896, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a Louisiana law requiring separate but equal accommodations for white Americans and African Americans on intrastate railroads was constitutional. In the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, Homer Plessy could pass for a white man even though, under Louisiana law, he is legally considered "colored." This is because he has one-eighth African blood in him, which allowed Louisiana law to prevent him from sitting on a white-only bus. The majority decision allowed states to declare their own requirements that qualify a person as “colored.” The argument put forward by Tourgée, Plessy's lawyer, was that membership in one race or another was a form of property and that denying reputation to that race was tantamount to taking away property from it without due legal process. After the case, a single justice, Justice Harlan, wrote his dissent to the majority's decision that racial classifications were not inherently unconstitutional. In his dissent, Harlan objects to the majority decision by sticking to the written terms of the Constitution and not imposing his sense of natural order on the document. Ultimately, Harlan's counterargument reveals that segregation laws are inconsistent with the Constitution. According to Brook Thomas, the only way to overcome a law that was created to base racism not only on the color of your skin, but now on the percentage of people of color. the blood that an individual possesses is education. By stating this, he is trying to show the difference between separate but equal educational accommodations between "whites" and "coloreds", and how this creates...... middle of paper...... before any state. should enact laws based on race or class. With Harlan proving that the majority's decision was inconsistent with the spirit of the republic, he was able to single-handedly overturn the decision of the case and prevent segregation from becoming a slippery slope toward racism. This dissent helped to reinforce that membership in one race or another was a form of property and that denying the reputation of that race was tantamount to taking away property from it without due process of law. But overall, Harlan was able to prove, through his counterargument, that the majority's decision was unconstitutional. Work cited by Thomas, Brook. Plessy v. Ferguson: A Brief History with Documents. Boston: Bedford, 1997. Print. Harlan, John, II. Plessy v. Ferguson: A Brief History with Documents. Boston: Bedford, 1997. Print.