Sarah Roberts and the early history of the “separate but equal” doctrine: A study in rhetoric, law, and social change

Abstract

This essay explores the early history of the “separate but equal”; doctrine in nineteenth century legal and political argumentation. By employing ironic and tragic frames, the authors challenge the traditional, linear approaches to legal historirizing. Moving beyond legal texts, the authors investigate how various communities in antebellum Boston negotiated conflicting views about how to best advance the cause of civil rights, both inside and outside the courtroom. These early debates created a complex rhetorical culture, and they provided jurists with several possible interpretations of the terms “separate”; and “equal.”; The authors conclude that these early debates, and Lemuel Shaw's subsequent decision in Sarah C. Roberts v. The City of Boston (1849), provide readers with insightful illustrations of the irony and tragedy of the law.