This paper examines the history of racial segregation in the United States, tracing the legal and social forces that entrenched inequality from the post-Civil War era through the mid-twentieth century. Beginning with the distinction between de facto and de jure segregation, the paper analyzes how landmark rulings such as Plessy v. Ferguson formalized Jim Crow laws, and how the NAACP, guided by Charles Houston, built a deliberate legal strategy to dismantle them. It culminates in an analysis of Brown v. Board of Education, arguing that segregation inherently produces inequality by requiring assumptions of racial superiority and inferiority, thus violating the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection guarantee.
The paper demonstrates precedent-chain analysis: rather than treating Brown v. Board of Education as an isolated breakthrough, it reconstructs the sequence of smaller cases (Gaines v. University of Missouri, Briggs v. Elliott, Gebhart v. Belton) that Houston and the NAACP deliberately assembled as legal stepping stones. This technique shows how legal argument is cumulative, requiring students to trace causes across time rather than focus only on headline rulings.
The paper opens with a conceptual introduction distinguishing types of segregation, then provides sociological context for how fear and ignorance sustained racial hierarchy. It pivots to legal history with Plessy v. Ferguson and Jim Crow, then addresses the post-Reconstruction enforcement gap. The final third focuses on the NAACP's three-point strategy under Charles Houston and concludes by interpreting Brown as a constitutionally grounded rejection of the separate-but-equal doctrine.
Racial segregation remains one of the most fundamentally perplexing questions within the body of American history. Many people erroneously believe that the racial and social structures that existed prior to the close of the Civil War in 1865 resulted in both fundamental and rapid changes for those who had been subjugated by slavery, immigration, and even war. The truth is far more complicated, and changes were much more gradual. The reality of segregation was social, legal, and economic, and to some degree still exists today in a de jure manner. "Although de jure segregation in the United States is most commonly associated with the South, segregation could be found at one time or another in every section of the country" (Finkelman, 2003; "South, The," Columbia Encyclopedia, 2000). Though the fundamental struggle of the civil rights movement has largely forced the eradication of de facto, or legally enforced, segregation, de jure — mostly social and traditional — segregation is still evident.
To gain a more complete understanding of the history of racial segregation, one must understand the fundamentals of de facto legal establishments of segregation. The development of civil and constitutional law is one that progresses through stages of social tolerance and social change. Like any other institution based on societal norms and conditions as well as individual decision-making, it is fallible and fluid. Each social stratification class, gender, or race has traveled through the analogs of judicial opinion based on a system of civil law established in Europe centuries ago. Law in general is not simply dictated by social issues — it also shapes them. Yet setting law aside for a moment, it can be argued that social change seems significantly to lag behind changes in the laws that govern society.
In the first half of the twentieth century, many major obstacles faced people whom centuries of popular history had labeled as racially impure. (Allport 84–85) The determining source of much of this fear and ignorance was, and to some degree still is, rooted in a simple fear of the unknown or the different. Through continued segregation, the "other" could still be seen as inferior, since few opportunities were offered for people to have candid exposure to anything outside the dominant culture. (Bell 207)
"The law had created two worlds, so separate that communication between them was almost impossible. Separation bred suspicion and hatred, fostered rumors and misunderstandings, and created conditions that made extremely difficult any steps toward its reduction." (Bell 207) Through the development of not only normative-based media but also financial and political control, the dominant culture retained the right to represent and view the "other" in any way it saw fit.
Often, reformers and politicians with firmly held ideas of the greater good — much like those ideas of manifest destiny expressed by imperialist settlers to the American continent — wavered between salvation and protection as the ultimate source of the alienation and segregation of Native American peoples. (Nash and Weiss 59–60) One very important lesson from this darker chapter of American history is that legal, social, and political changes occur slowly, through time and struggle. Questions of racial dominance evolved through the legal system not so much in a timeline of steady progress but more clearly through a one-step-forward, two-steps-back process. In the legal arena, the ideas associated with race and social change did not move progressively toward cultural fairness but rather sputtered and stalled, with the ultimate goal of social equality remaining unmet even today.
No law, amendment, or body of laws stands in isolation from other legal precedents or social opinion. Whether bolstered by state or federal amendments, acts, or Supreme Court rulings, each significant law required many prior legal decisions to establish the unfair system of governance that preceded it. These shortcomings had to be legally struck down, and usually several stepping-stone cases — foundational in their causation — were necessary before tide-turning rulings such as Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954) could be achieved. (PBS.org, 2003)
It was the responsibility of the law to attempt to ensure that employment, housing, and educational opportunities were provided equally to both races. But the existence of laws maintaining segregation, coupled with the long-held social belief in white racial superiority, ensured that separate facilities were almost guaranteed to be inferior to those provided to whites. Antebellum gains made through legal rulings such as the Fifteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, required far more constitutional and legal support than would seem necessary if one simply looked to legal statutes as guidelines for social change. In fact, it required so much reinforcement that a Voting Rights Act was needed in 1965 to enable Black Americans to vote without fear of discriminatory registration exams or arbitrary poll taxes. (Bell 122) To a large degree, any gains made required not only continued and vigilant enforcement — which was rarely forthcoming — but also a combination of legal and social action to maintain the integrity of the law's intent. (Bell 119)
In the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the establishment of a legal precedent for racial segregation in public railway cars began an already contentious legal climb toward a body of laws that would later become known as Jim Crow laws — named for a blackface vaudevillian character who served as a popular racial stereotype in the late 1800s. With this initial establishment of legally enforceable segregation, the country was swept by laws governing everything from public schools to movie theaters and cafes.
The mandates themselves sent a shockwave of renewed fear and hatred through both the dominant and minority populations, as previously unspoken social codes and standards surfaced as enforceable acts of social control. Though segregation in many forms — most likely associated with employment and financial gain — had existed before this time, communities in states as unlikely as Oregon now adopted segregation laws in the name of maintaining order or bolstering feelings of racial superiority that already existed.
The laws became so detailed that, as many historians have noted, no provision was too small for some state and local governments to mandate and enforce. (Bell 207) The number of laws and the states enacting them grew exponentially at the beginning of the twentieth century, and enforcement of the "equal" portion of the federal ruling established in Plessy v. Ferguson was rarely given any serious thought.
You’re 55% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.