In the 1935 case of Moor v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad Co., the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company, reversing a decision made by the Louisiana Supreme Court. The plaintiff, Moor, had filed a lawsuit against his employer after he was injured on duty due to alleged negligence on part of his co-workers and supervisors. He claimed that under federal law (the Federal Employers' Liability Act), he should be compensated for his injuries as they were caused by negligence within interstate commerce operations. However, both parties involved were from Louisiana and thus it fell under state jurisdiction according to diversity jurisdiction rules which require at least one party not being from same state for federal courts to have authority over such cases. The U.S Supreme court held that since all parties involved were from same state i.e., there was no diversity between them hence this case did not fall under its purview but rather belonged in a state court.

In the dissenting opinion for Moor v. Texas & New Orleans Railroad Co., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring separate but equal facilities for black and white passengers violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. The dissenting justices believed that this segregation inherently implied inequality, as it suggested that African Americans were unfit to share public spaces with whites. They also pointed out inconsistencies in how these laws were applied, noting instances where blacks and whites shared facilities without issue when there weren't enough people to justify separation by race. This inconsistency further demonstrated that such laws served no purpose other than discrimination based on color, which is unconstitutional according to their interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.