Separate but equal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Separate but equal is a phrase used to describe a system of segregation, where people of different ethnic backgrounds (or, in practice, people simply perceived to be different from each other in a manner considered significant enough to justify segregationist policies or practices) have the same qualitative and quantitative rights to services and facilities, but receive them apart from each other.
As noted below, it has also recently been used in debate over same-sex partnerships.
Contents |
[edit] United States
It was used by attorneys for the NAACP during the Supreme Court litigation of Brown v. Board of Education (1954), to refer to the phrase "equal but separate" used in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) as a custom of de jure racial segregation enacted into law. The NAACP, led by later Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, was successful in challenging the constitutionality of Plessy and the Court voted to overturn 60 years of law under Plessy.
After the American Civil War (1861–1865) brought about the end of slavery in the USA, Plessy became the de-facto standard throughout the U.S. Southern states, and represented the institionalization of the segregation period. African-Americans and European-Americans would receive the same services (schools, hospitals, water fountains, bathrooms, etc.), but that there would be distinct facilities for each race. In practice, the services and facilities reserved for African-Americans were frequently of lower quality than those reserved for whites; for example, many African-American schools received less public funding per student than nearby white schools.
The legitimacy of such laws was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537. The repeal of "separate but equal" laws was a key focus of the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. In Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), the Supreme Court outlawed segregated public education facilities for blacks and whites at the state level; the companion case of Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 outlawed such practices at the Federal level in the District of Columbia.
[edit] South Africa
The phrase was also used in apartheid South Africa , where officials claimed that services for blacks were as good as services for whites.
[edit] Same-sex unions and same-sex marriage
The phrase has also come into use more recently in debate surrounding same-sex civil unions vs. Same-sex marriage, with some claiming that civil unions giving gays the same rights as straight marriages is another example of separate but equal treatment.
