Equality Before the Law Does Not Mean Equality of Subjective Feelings

 The concept of equality before the law is widely debated, as there is no clear agreement on how everyone should be treated equally. Questions arise regarding the implications of the Fourteenth Amendment, including whether it guarantees social status and feelings of inclusion for all citizens.

1. Justice Harlan's Dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson: Justice Harlan asserted that the Fourteenth Amendment ensures all citizens are equal before the law, rejecting the notion of a dominant race. He argued that racial segregation implies inferiority and creates distrust among races.

2. The Majority View in Plessy: The majority ruled that "separate but equal" did not mandate racial integration, referencing earlier cases like Roberts v. City of Boston. They contended that the law cannot force social equality, which should arise naturally, rather than through legislation.

3. Brown v. Board of Education: This case reinforced Harlan's dissent by stating that segregated schools harm black children's self-esteem and that racial integration is critical for social equality. The courts now prioritize public inclusion based on feelings of belonging rather than merely legal rights.

4. Changing Interpretations of Equality: Current interpretations of equality focus on emotions and perceptions of social status rather than material equality. The concept of constitutional rights has expanded to include protection against feelings of offense or exclusion based on race.

5. Critique of Harlan's View: While Harlan opposed state-enforced segregation, he misapplied the principle of freedom of association. The argument stands that state compulsion—whether to segregate or integrate—violates this freedom. Forcing integration can be as harmful as enforcing segregation.

6. Contemporary Movements: Contemporary racial initiatives, such as the Black Out movement which promotes exclusive spaces for black audiences, echo Harlan's concerns about equality but suggest that segregation is a tool for empowerment rather than division.

The principle of equality before the law remains complex, with varying interpretations concerning individuals' feelings and state responsibilities. While Harlan highlighted the need for legal equality, his view on inclusion reflects a misunderstanding of freedom of association. Ultimately, the challenge lies in balancing legal protections with individual freedoms, leaving room for debate regarding emotional perceptions of equality in society. 

https://mises.org/mises-wire/equality-law-does-not-mean-equality-subjective-feelings