Read the following excerpt from Plessy v. Ferguson.

Question

"The object of the [Fourteenth] amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to either. Laws permitting, and even requiring, their separation in places where they are liable to be brought into contact do not necessarily imply the inferiority of either race to the other, and have been generally, if not universally, recognized as within the competency of the state legislatures in the exercise of their police power. The most common instance of this is connected with the establishment of separate schools for white and colored children, which has been held to be a valid exercise of the legislative power even by courts of States where the political rights of the colored race have been longest and most earnestly enforced...."

Explain how this decision legally interpreted the Constitution prior to the civil rights movement.
A. The decision used liberal constructionism by citing the precedent of separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.
B. The decision used strict constructionism by explaining the federal power to legislate education with state borders.
C. The decision used liberal constructionism by interpreting the amendment's author's intent to explain the Fourteenth Amendment.
D. The decision used strict constructionism by refraining from attempting to decipher the intent behind the Fourteenth Amendment.

Answer 1

D. The decision used strict constructionism by refraining from attempting to decipher the intent behind the Fourteenth Amendment.

The excerpt from Plessy v. Ferguson shows a strict interpretation of the Constitution, as it argues that segregation laws are within the competency of state legislatures and are not in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision does not consider the intent behind the amendment or interpret it in a broad sense to promote equality. Instead, it upholds the separate but equal doctrine, which allowed for the racial segregation of public facilities.