美国经典判例Plessy v. Ferguson

eprovisionsoftheconstitutionoftheUnitedStates,ifitconferreduponthemunicipalauthoritiesarbitrarypower,attheirownwill,andwithoutregardtodiscretion,inthelegalsenseoftheterm,togiveorwithholdconsentastopersonsorplaces,petencyofthepersonsapplyingortheproprietyoftheplacesselectedforthecarryingonofthebusiness.ItwasheldtobeacovertattemptonthepartofthemunicipalitytomakeanarbitraryandunjustdiscriminationagainsttheChineserace.Whilethiswasthecaseofamunicipalordinance,alikeprinciplehasbeenheldtoapplytoactsofastatelegislaturepassedintheexerciseofthepolicepower.RailroadCo.v.Husen,95U.S.465;Louisville&N.R.Co.v.Kentucky,161U.S.677,16Sup.Ct.714,andcasescitedonpage700,161U.S.,andpage714,16Sup.Ct.;Daggettv.Hudson,43OhioSt.548,3N.E.538;Capenv.Foster,12Pick.485;Statev.Baker,38Wis.71;Monroev.Collins,17OhioSt.665;