Newspaper Page Text
i
t
SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS—MARCH 1956— PAGE 5
Federal Court Finds Louisiana School Laws Unconstitutional
NEW ORLEANS, La.
T OTJISIAna’s plan to preserve segre-
gation through state laws col
lapsed under a federal court ruling
in February.
The same ruling that declared all
Louisiana segregation laws invalid
also ordered the integration of Or
leans Parish (county) public schools
“with all deliberate speed.”
Handed down by District Judge J.
Skelly Wright, the ruling gave the
Orleans Parish school board “a year
or more” to complete desegregation.
But the first actions by segrega
tion’s upholders in the state were not
desegregation plans. Instead there
were announcements of appeal to
higher courts, and vows to enact new
laws to fill the breach left by those
declared invalid.
PLAN MEETING
State Sen. William Rainach of
Homer, leader of the fight against in
tegration, said there will be a meet
ing in Baton Rouge of the joint seg
regation committee of the legislature
sometime before the full legislature
convenes May 14. (See “Legislative
Action.”) Rainach is committee
chairman as well as president of the
new Louisiana Citizens Council As
sociation.
From Earl K. Long, who will be
sworn in as governor May 15, came
no elaboration on his campaign
pledge to close any public school be
fore allowing it to integrate under
federal court order. (See “What They
Say”)
Meanwhile, New Orleans’ Catho
lics, who operate a private school
system nearly as large as the public
system, were told by their leader,
Archbishop Joseph Francis Rummel,
that segregation is “morally wrong.”
Archdiocesan spokesman had pre
viously announced that the decision
to integrate the 75,000-pupil paro
chial school system has been made,
and that only the date for the change
over was unsettled.
Federal Judge J. Skelly Wright,
Orleans-born and educated, ordered
the start of integration in the city’s
public schools on Feb. 15.
A court action on behalf of 95 Ne
gro juveniles (Bush v. Orleans Parish
School Board) had been pending for
months. The most common reaction
of Orleans public leaders and private
citizens, as noted by newsmen, was
astonishment that the decision came
so quickly and decisively.
It had generally been supposed
that officials of the two large school
systems—public (78,000 pupils) and
Parochial (75,000 pupils) — would
somehow “get together” on plans to
preserve the structure of their seg
regated educational programs.
But in the past year there have
been increasingly pointed statements
by parochial officials that segregation
w as on the way out.
Public school officials remained
stoutly segregationist.
Now, the Wright decision points
^tit the fundamental difference be
tween the two school systems. The
Catholic schools, unaffected by seg
regation laws, seem on the way
oward integration. The public
spools, legally-bound, are being
steered on a course which Louisiana
eaders hope will veer around the
u Preme Court’s segregation deci
sion
r uled invalid
This is a futile task. Judge Wright’s
?cision implies. “The legislative
3,1 i°r maintaining segregation of
v v sc b°l s Louisiana is in-
id. ’ he ruled, citing the Supreme
s decision in Brown v. Board
i Education of Topeka.
three-judge court had the case
, er advisement. After ruling on
“Points, Judge Wayne G. Borah
^ Herbert W. Christenberry with-
Wri V i5 r ° m case * n f avor °f Judge
the <5 These points were (1) that
h . Su Preme Court’s segregation de-
of I° n 17, 1954, invalidated all
tm~““hiana’s constitutional and sta-
segregation provisions; and
(2) that since the case involved ‘“no
serious constitutional question not
heretofore decided by the Supreme
Court” one judge could legally rule.
The defense took the form of five
motions for dismissal, four of which
Judge Wright disallowed. He agreed
the plaintiff had not followed a
“highly technical” procedure in
amending the list of defendants in the
complaint when Orleans Parish
changed school superintendents. The
judge said this was no basis for dis
missal of the action.
The day following the decision
Celestine P. Besse, president of the
Orleans Parish school board, ordered
the board’s special attorney, Gerard
A. Rault, to prepare an appeal. Eight
days later the full board approved
Besse’s action. The board head said
that body was determined “to use
every legal and honorable means to
preserve segregation.”
Chairman Rainach said the joint
segregation committee of the legisla
ture will not wait until the regular
convening day, May 14, to begin work
on a new set of segregation legisla
tion.
The Orleans ruling invalidated all
three legal devices set up in 1954 to
bar integration in Louisiana—Acts
555 and 556, and the amendment
which became Article 12, section 1 of
the Constitution. These entrusted
segregation to the state’s police pow
ers and to each school superintend
ent’s authority to assign all pupils.
Rainach said that interposition
would be one of the main means con
sidered in the “new” fight on inte
gration. He declined to “tip his hand”
on the others.
One proposal which will come be
fore the segregation committee sug
gest reenactment of the “police
powers” law, amended to cover pri
vate as well as public schools. This
plan was advanced in a letter to
Rainach by four Orleans-area legis
lators.
‘NO SURPRISE’
Rainach said Wright’s ruling came
as “no surprise,” but he didin’t ex
pect him “to go as far as he did.”
“Judge Wright leaned over back
ward” to placate the NAACP, Rain
ach said. “Had it been anything but
an NAACP case it would have been
thrown out of court for procedural
errors.”
Louisiana State University’s board
of supervisors passed two controver
sial resolutions after two long and
heated secret meetings.
One resolution declared the uni
versity will not institute “stiffened”
entrance requirements in order to
impede registration of Negro under
graduates. A January court ruling
ordered LSU to admit qualified Ne
gro undergraduates, but so far none
has applied. The “stiffening” pro
posed at an earlier meeting would
have taken the form of entrance and
health examinations, and letters of
recommendation from two LSU
alumni.
The second resolution continued
permission for LSU athleties to com
pete against Negroes in any sport.
LSU has contracted for a home-and-
home football series with the Uni
versity of Wisconsin, which uses
Negro athletes.
In another state school, Louisiana
Tech at Ruston, registration of three
Negroes was blocked on a technicali
ty, transfer of previous college rec
ords two weeks before registration
date. Tech is one of three state col
leges not required by court order to
admit Negro undergraduates. Four
are under integration order.
SCHOOL BOARDS
AND SCHOOLMEN
A unanimous resolution calling for
continued segregation came out of the
annual convention of the Louisiana
School Boards Association in New
CELESTINE P. BESSE
Orders Appeal
Orleans. Four hundred delegates
joined in a statement that “the
greater majority of our Negro people
are not in favor of integration, and
in order to protect them from a vi
cious radical minority it is essential
that segregation be maintained.”
Another statewide group ordered
expulsion for member schools which
integrate. It was the Louisiana High
School Athletic Association, conven
ing at Alexandria. Any school which
integrates automatically loses its
LHSAA membership, officials an
nounced. Nearly all state high
schools, private and public, are
LHSAA members.
Governor-designate Long kept his
silence on the Orleans integration
order for more than a week. Then he
said, “We still need segregation in
the South... I am the best friend the
poor white and the colored man ever
had as governor of this state, but I
say he (the Negro) is not ready in the
South.” Long declined to discuss ap
plication of his “closure-before-inte-
gration” campaign pledge in connec
tion with New Orleans public schools.
He said he favored “no state inter
ference” if private schools integrated.
Archbishop Rummel said, “I think
as men of wisdom, prudence and
foresight they (school and other pub
lic officials) should have a plan pre
pared in case segregation cannot be
continued. But they just say segrega
tion must go on, period.”
The Commission on Human Rights
of the Catholic Committee of the
South heard a District of Columbia
health official declare that attendance
of white and Negro children at the
same schools does not cause an in
crease in the spread of venereal dis
eases. VD is not spread through mu
tual contact with inanimate objects,
according to Dr. S. R. Taggert, chief
of the district health dept.’s VD pro
gram.
A Citizens Council Assn, was
formed at Baton Rouge, and Sen.
Rainach was named president. He
said that 13 of Louisiana’s 64 par
ishes (counties) already have Citi
zens Councils with membership of
8,000.
siiiaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin
Bilillilllii
-AS,:
'pccia
Wright’s Opinion in Orleans Parish Dispute
r J^HE end of segregation in the Or
leans Parish schools was ordered
Feb. 15 by Federal District Judge J.
Skelly Wright, after a three-judge
court declared Louisiana’s provisions
for preserving segregation unconsti
tutional. This was the first test of
pro-segregation devices adopted fol
lowing the Supreme Court’s 1954 de
cisions. Text of Judge Wright’s de
cision in the case of Earl Benjamin
Rush et al v. Orleans Parish School
Board follows:
“This action in equity is brought
in behalf of minor Negro plaintiffs
and all other Negroes similarly sit
uated, seeking a declaratory judg
ment and injunctive relief against the
defendants who maintain and op
erate pursuant to state statute the
public schools of the Parish of Or
leans, La.
“Before the Court at this time is
the application for a temporary in
junction.
“The public schools of the city of
New Orleans are segregated, that is,
there are separate schools for white
and Negro pupils. Plaintiffs allege
that this segregation deprives them
of equal protection of the law under
the 14th Amendment to the Consti
tution of the United States, and that
under Brown v. Board of Education
of Topeka, 349 U. S. 294, the defend
ants should be restrained from con
tinuing this practice. In addition to
certain preliminary defenses, de
fendants contend that pursuant to
Article 21, 1 of the Constitution of
Louisiana and Louisiana Acts 555
and 556 of 1954, all enacted subse
quent to the decision of the Supreme
Court in Brown, the public schools
of New Orleans are operated on a
segregated basis as an exercise of the
police power of the state, and, there
fore, the decision of the Supreme
Court in Brown, outlawing segrega
tion on the basis of race, is not dis
positive of the issue here. This con
tention was considered and rejected
by this court, sitting with three
judges.
“There remains for disposition
then only the preliminary defenses.
“In their first preliminary defense,
the defendants say that this action is
in effect a suit against the state of
Louisiana, which has not consented
to be sued, and therefore, this court
is without jurisdiction. But a suit
against officers or agents of a state
acting illegally is not a suit against
the state ...
“The Brown case itself was brought
against the Board of Education of
Topeka, Kan., just as the suit here is
brought against the state board
charged by statute with the admin
istration of public schools. In addi
tion, practically every one of the
multitude of school cases which have
litigated through the courts and be
fore the Supreme Court has been
brought against state agencies ad
ministering the schools. Certainly if
there were any lack of jurisdiction,
some court along this line, including
the Supreme Court, in at least one
of the cases, would have noticed it,
as courts are required to do although
the issue is not raised. Moreover, the
statute creating the defendant board
here gives it the right to sue and be
sued. La R. S. 17:51...
“Defendants also move to dismiss
on the ground that no justiciable con
troversy is presented by the plead
ings. This motion is without merit.
“The complaint plainly states that
plaintiffs are being deprived of their
constitutional rights by being re
quired by the defendants to attend
segregated schools, and that they
have petitioned the defendant board
in vain to comply with the ruling of
the Supreme Court in Brown v.
Board of Education of Topeka, supra.
The defendants admit that they are
maintaining segregation in the public
schools, under their supervision, pur
suant to the state statutes and the
article of the Constitution of Louisi
ana in suit. If this issue does not pre
sent a justiciable controversy, it is
difficult to conceive of one.
“Finally, the defendants contend
that the plaintiffs have not exhausted
their administrative remedies under
Louisiana Act 556 of 1954 and that,
consequently, this action must be dis
missed. Act 556 of 1954 was part of
the legislative plan, enacted subse
quent to the Supreme Court’s deci
sion in Brown v. Board of Education,
of Toveka supra to avoid the effect of
that decision in order to retain seg
regation in the public schools of the
state. Article 12, 1 of the Louisiana
Constitution, passed in 1954, makes
segregation through the exercise of
police power part of the constitution
al law of the state.
“Act 565 of 1954 implements that
constitutional provision by providing
that “all public elementary and sec
ondary schools in the state of Louisi
ana shall be operated separately for
white and colored children” and Act
556 of 1954 details the means by
which segregation is to be achieved.
It provides that each parish super
intendent of schools throughout this
state shall, each year, determine the
particular public school within each
parish to be attended by each school
child applying for admission to pub
lic schools, and that no school child
shall be entitled to enter a public
school unless assigned in accordance
with the provisions of the act. The
act goes on further to provide for a
hearing before the school sunerin-
tendent and the board if there is dis
satisfaction with the school assign
ment of anv narticular child For the
reasons stated in the opinion of this
court sitting with three judges ren
dered this day, the legislative plan
for maintaining segregation in the
public schools of Louisiana is invalid.
Since the administrative remedy out
lined in Act 556 is part of the plan, it
is invalid on its face and may be dis
regarded.
.. Should Act 556 be considered
alone and not part of the over-all
legislative plan, then it is invalid as
an unlawful delegation of legislative
authority for the reason that no
standards on which the superintend
ent may base his assignment of chil
dren are included therein... The
only standards for assignment given
in the plan is in Act 555 which pro
vides for segregation of the races,
which is, of course, invalid under
Brown.
“As a practical matter, plaintiffs
here have exhausted their adminis
trative remedies. They have peti
tioned the board on three separate
occasions, asking that their children
be assigned to nonsegregated schools.
The board not only has refused to
desegregate the schools, but has
passed a resolution noting the exist
ence of the present suit and stating,
‘It is not only to the manifest inter
est of this board and in accord with
its express policy, but also in fur
therance of the public welfare of this
community that this suit and any
others that might be instituted with
the same objective be vigorously, ag
gressively and capably defended.’
“To remit each of these minor
children and the thousands of others
similarly situated to thousands of
administrative hearings before this
board to seek the relief to which the
Supreme Court of the United States
has said they are entitled, would be
a vain and useless gesture, unworthy
of a court of equity. It would be a
travesty in which this court will not
participate.
The granting of a temporary in
junction in this case does not mean
that the public schools in the parish
of Orleans would be ordered com
pletely desegregated overnight, or
even in a year or more. The Supreme
Court in ordering equitable relief in
these cases has decreed that the va
ried local school problems be con
sidered in each case. The problems
attending desegregation in the Deep
South are considerably more serious
than generally appreciated in some
sections of the country.
“The problem of changing a peo
ple’s mores, particularly those with
an emotional overlay, is not to be
taken lightly. It is a problem which
will require the utmost patience,
understanding, generosity and fore-
bearance from all of us, of whatever
race. But the magnitude of the prob
lem may not nullify the principle.
And that principle is that we are, all
of us, freeborn Americans, with a
right to make our way, unfettered by
sanctions imposed by man because of
the work of God.”