Justice Harlan’s Dissenting Opinion

In the monumental case Plessy v. Ferguson, one of the most historically important decisions was made in the Supreme Court. In a 7-1 vote, the Court decided to approve separate but equal “gave constitutional sanction to laws designed to achieve racial segregation by means of separate and equal public facilities and services for African Americans and whites”. However, there was one justice, John Marshall Harlan, who made the bold decision to reveal his dissenting opinion on the matter. In this case, Homer Plessy sat in a rail car for “whites only” and was arrested. Upon presentation in court, he argued the constitutionality of segregation specifically under the “separate but equal” doctrine. The Court disagreed, saying it was in fact constitutional, but Justice Harlan disagreed with the Louisiana law enforcing segregation in rail cars. 

Justice John Harlan felt very strongly against racial inequalities and was a major voice promoting the rights of African American citizens. This gave them a glimmer of hope that the white community would, at some point, accept them and allow them to integrate into society equally. Harlan ruled fiercely against his colleagues on grounds that the Constitution is colorblind and therefore it would be morally and ethically wrong to treat races as if one is more deserving of rights than another. Justice Harlan said: “The arbitrary separation of citizens on the basis of race while they are on a public highway is a badge of servitude wholly inconsistent with the civil freedom and the equality before the law established by the Constitution. It cannot be justified upon any legal grounds”.

Though this case took place right at the start of the Civil Rights Movement, Harlan’s dissenting opinion was very shocking to the public. Even with all other voting justices believing oppositely of him, he still was able to make and argue his opinion to the public. He feared the other view would create a divide amongst races and therefore slow and prohibit the progression towards advancement for colored people. Through support of the verbiage of the Constitution, it proved there was no support nor notion towards segregation and inequality towards African Americans. Thus, in his opinion, there should not be ill-feelings remaining towards opposing races, rather we should come together and create a trust amongst races.

Not only do I agree with Justice John Harlan, but I find it very admirable he was able to present this opinion. Especially with opposition not only from the general public, but more closely from the other U.S. Supreme Court justices. Besides the immense importance behind the Plessy v. Ferguson case itself, Harlan’s dissenting vote and opinion stand as a backbone for the progress that occurred during the years following in the Civil Rights Movement. It stood for equality, justice and the importance of freedom, and it is commemorative that it came from someone of such importance at the time as Justice John Harlan. 

Sources:

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1335/john-marshall-harlan-i#:~:text=In%20his%20most%20famous%20and,of%20race.%E2%80%9D%20Harlan%20predicted%20that

https://louisville.edu/law/library/special-collections/the-john-marshall-harlan-collection/harlans-great-dissent

https://www.thinkwy.org/post/justice-harlans-imperishable-dissent-in-plessy-v-ferguson

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/separate_but_equal#:~:text=Implementation%20of%20the%20%E2%80%9Cseparate%20but,for%20African%20Americans%20and%20whites

https://billofrightsinstitute.org/activities/handout-e-john-marshall-harlan-dissent-from-plessy-v-ferguson-1896

In the Heat of the Night

After viewing In the Heat of the Night, it became apparent the clear contrast between this movie and other films we have viewed in class, such as Band of Angels. The movie portrays a murder mystery in the South in 1967, a case needing to be solved. We find that local police have to solve this crime with the help of a detective from the North. Obviously this film takes place in a later time than our other films, a period filled with social and societal changes and advancements. This film, unlike the others, focuses on the changes in societal views towards African Americans and how the race was slowly becoming more integrated and accepted throughout society. 

The movie begins with the murder of a wealthy white man, Philip Colbert. We meet the southern Sheriff Bill Gillespie work together with northern Detective Virgil Tibbs to investigate the cause of this tragedy along with the murderer themselves. I really found it interesting, especially in comparison to the other films we’ve watched, how races were portrayed here and how much they worked together cooperatively. During this time the issue of race and racial equality and inequities was very important, since we are in the time of the Civil Rights Movement. Though originally falsely accused of murder, Virgil ends up playing a lead role and helping to work through the case and its evidence. A black man playing a lead role during this time was shocking, especially one that is respectable. 

Another key part of the film that really resonated with me was the relationship between Tibbs and Gillespie from the beginning to the end of the movie. Originally, which is normal for this time, Gillespie holds the general stereotypes and feelings towards Tibbs because of the color of his skin. Over time, Tibbs proves himself to be far above the general stereotypes, and to actually be quite accomplished and intelligent. The sheriff changes his beliefs and perceptions towards Virgil Tibbs and ultimately grows to respect him because of his passion along with how educated and accomplished he is. Contrary to the societal norms of the time, this challenges biases and inequities between races and shows the progressive time the film takes place in. 

This is not to say that this film showed complete respect and positive attitudes towards the advancement of colored people, because there are plenty of examples of it that still prevail. Prior to the bond that the sheriff developed with Virgil, he assumed that he was involved in the murder upon finding he had a lot of money with him that day. This, due to societal views towards African Americans, seemed impossible and that he had to have had some involvement in order to get this money. As discussed, it is later found that he is just a hard working, accomplished man and the stereotypes do not apply to him. 

Overall, I really enjoyed this movie and the comprehensive progress it shows towards African American people. I think the use of the plot and the development of characters really helped to portray that theme. Though as I said before, the movie was not completely unbiased and morally right in the way African Americans were treated, but it was a strong representation of the time period. It was a well displayed depiction of what was being accomplished in society at the time. I really enjoyed the film and I would say it is my favorite so far.