Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf
Page Number: 149

10  STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v. PRESIDENT 

AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE 
SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

B 
The Reconstruction era marked a transformational point 
in the history of American democracy.  Its vision of equal 
opportunity  leading  to  an  equal  society  “was  short-lived,” 
however, “with the assistance of this Court.”  Id., at 391.  In 
a series of decisions, the Court “sharply curtailed” the “sub-
stantive  protections”  of  the  Reconstruction  Amendments 
and the Civil Rights Acts.  Id., at 391–392 (collecting cases).
That endeavor culminated with the Court’s shameful deci-
sion in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U. S. 537 (1896), which es-
tablished  that  “equality  of  treatment”  exists  “when  the
races  are  provided  substantially  equal  facilities,  even 
though these facilities be separate.”  Brown, 347 U. S., at 
488.   Therefore,  with  this  Court’s approval,  government-
enforced  segregation  and  its  concomitant  destruction  of 
equal opportunity became the constitutional norm and in-
fected every sector of our society, from bathrooms to mili-
tary units and, crucially, schools.  See Bakke, 438 U. S., at 
393–394  (opinion  of  Marshall,  J.);  see  also  generally  R. 
Rothstein, The Color of Law 17–176 (2017) (discussing var-
ious federal policies that promoted racial segregation). 

In a powerful dissent, Justice Harlan explained in Plessy
that the Louisiana law at issue, which authorized segrega-
tion in railway carriages, perpetuated a “caste” system.  163 
U. S., at 559–560.  Although the State argued that the law 
“prescribe[d] a rule applicable alike to white and colored cit-
izens,” all knew that the law’s purpose was not “to exclude 
white  persons  from  railroad  cars  occupied  by  blacks,”  but
“to exclude colored people from coaches occupied by or as-
signed to white persons.”  Id., at 557.  That is, the law “pro-
ceed[ed] on the ground that colored citizens are so inferior 
and degraded that they cannot  be allowed to sit in public 
coaches occupied by white citizens.”  Id., at 560.  Although
“[t]he white race deems itself to be the dominant race . . . in 
prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth, and in
power,”  Justice  Harlan  explained,  there  is  “no  superior,