Clyburn: Supreme Court 'Is Attempting To Reinstate Plessy Versus Ferguson'
On MSNBC's 'PoliticsNation', Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) accused the Supreme Court of effectively reviving the Plessy v. Ferguson 'separate but equal' standard through recent rulings, signaling a dangerous rollback of civil rights protections.
Rep. Jim Clyburn’s stark warning that the current Supreme Court is 'attempting to reinstate Plessy versus Ferguson' names a specific and alarming legal trajectory. The Court's recent decisions—in cases involving affirmative action, voting rights, and school desegregation—have systematically dismantled the legal architecture that ended state-sanctioned segregation. By requiring explicit proof of intentional discrimination while ignoring systemic and institutional inequities, the Court is creating a framework where separate outcomes are permissible as long as there is no overt exclusion.
This is not merely rhetorical. The Court’s reasoning in cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision (which gutted Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act) has effectively turned back the clock on the enforceable equality established by Brown v. Board of Education. The harm falls disproportionately on Black, Brown, and poor communities who now face resegregated schools, suppressed voting power, and weakened anti-discrimination law. The ‘separate but equal’ standard was never equally applied; it legalized apartheid. Its reappearance, in judicial disguise, threatens to institutionalize inequality anew.
The concrete progressive alternative is clear and urgent: Congress must pass federal statutes that restore robust protections under the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, and the Equal Protection Clause. The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Equality Act are concrete, ready-made fixes. Simultaneously, state legislatures can pass their own civil rights enforcement mechanisms, independent of the Supreme Court’s shrinking interpretation. Communities can organize for school funding equity and challenge housing discrimination under existing state and local laws. The legal battle is not lost; it has simply moved from the courtroom to the legislature and the streets.
The humanitarian alternative
A humanitarian alternative that addresses the legitimate goal of legal consistency without sacrificing equality: Congress should pass the Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore preclearance for jurisdictions with a history of discrimination, and the Equality Act to codify broad nondiscrimination protections in federal law. These statutes would provide clear, enforceable standards that the Court cannot erode. At the state level, Nebraska school boards can adopt equity-focused funding formulas that tie resources to student need, not property wealth, and Washington housing authorities can enforce fair housing mandates through local human rights commissions. The goal is a legal environment where equal outcomes—not merely separate facilities—are the measurable standard.
Falsifiable predictions
What this entry claims will happen, and what data would prove it wrong. The Reckoner revisits these against current reality.
- Within 12 months, the Supreme Court will issue at least one major ruling that explicitly narrows the scope of equal protection for racial minorities.
- Democratic-led states will introduce at least 10 bills in the next legislative session that explicitly reference Plessy v. Ferguson as a warning in their preambles.
Original source — excerpted
news Clyburn: ‘This Supreme Court Is Attempting to Reinstate Plessy Versus Ferguson’"Saturday on MS NOW’s “PoliticsNation,” Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) said the Supreme Court was trying to reinstate Plessy v. Ferguson, the overturned ruling ..."