Newspaper Page Text
If 2?
Factual
THIRN SCHOOL NEWS
SfOl
Objective
APRIL, 1963
Decision A
VO ‘SN3H1V
noisiaia snoilrsinoov
. 53IHV88I1
V I 08030 JO AINf)
: 8003-H-C9 NOP
_m_ w pil Transfer Plans
NASHVILLE
4 TT0RNEYS REPRESENTING Negro
plaintiffs and several school
! systems in Tennessee are awaiting
an opinion of the U.S. Supreme
Court which on March 21 took
under advisement a request to
strike down pupil transfer plans
in Davidson County and Knox
ville.
Lawyers for both sides described the
forthcoming opinion as “tremendously
significant,” because of its possible ef
fect on desegregation plans now fol
lowed by school districts in Tennessee
I and in other states in the South.
Although only the school boards of
Davidson County and Knoxville are in
volved directly, the school systems of
Memphis and Chattanooga joined in
defending the pupil transfer provisions.
Several other school officials from
Southern cities were on hand for the
arguments before the high tribunal on
March 20 and 21.
A decision is expected sometime be
fore the end of the Supreme Court’s
term in June. Some of the attorneys
. said it could be handed down in April.
Major Question
The major question to be decided by
| the court is whether the transfer pro
visions, under which students of both
races may transfer from schools where
their race is in the minority, are un
constitutional as contended by Negro
petitioners and the Justice Depart
ment’s civil rights division.
Also presented before the court were
arguments on whether the transfer pro
visions deprive Negro students of their
rights under the 14th Amendment by
expressly recognizing race as a grounds
for transfer.
Attorney K. Harlan Dodson of Nash
ville, representing the Davidson County
board of education; Attorney S. Frank
Fowler of Knoxville, counsel for the
Knoxville board of education and At
torney Jack Petree of Memphis, repre
senting the Memphis board of educa
tion, defended the transfer plan in their
arguments.
The Memphis and Chattanooga boards
were allowed to file “friend of the
court” briefs supporting the position
taken by the Davidson County and
Knoxville boards.
Attorney Jack Greenberg of New
York, counsel for the National Asso
ciation for the Advancement of Colored
People, presented arguments for the
Negro plaintiffs who had appealed the
decision of the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court
of Appeals at Cincinnati. The appeals
court upheld the transfer provisions in
April, 1962 in both cases (Maxwell et
al v. Davidson County Board of Edu
cation and Goss et al v. Knoxville
Board of Education.)
Assistant Attorney General Burke
Marshall, chief of the Justice Depart
ment’s civil rights division which also
entered the case as a “friend of the
court,” contended that school boards
could not use race as the basis ol
transfer.
Nashville attorney Avon N. Williams
Jr., counsel for Negro plaintiffs in both
cases, assisted Greenberg.
Greenberg opened his attack on the
transfer provisions by charging that
both school systems adopted them pri
marily to maintain as much segregation
as possible.
Today’s Supreme Court: Another School Case
Sealed: Associate Justices Tom C. Clark and Hugo L. Black, Chief Justice Earl
Warren, Associate Justices William O. Douglas and John M. Harlan. Standing
Associate Justices Byron R. White, William J. Brennan Jr., Potter Stewart and
Arthur J. Goldberg.
ALABAMA
Parents Join Government
In Desegregation Suits
ty’ s
eti-
’"j
a-
iia' s
t
W
Ik
an*
for
res'
ped
thd
\<r
ft*
lUH*
LtioO
0
the
- MONTGOMERY
JUOVING INDEPENDENTLY of Jus-
j tice Department suits filed
if n . ^ against school boards in
f bl e and Madison (Huntsville)
•^unties, Negro parents in both
M 6 - ^ ed class action suits in
a'l f ■ s f e ki n g desegregation of
ac ilities for all Negro students
not just those from federally
^cted .families.
of M ^ uc ^ e Daniel H. Thomas
a m .. set a hearing for April 25 on
,erf iDor^ n b .y 11 Negro parents for a
b:i e r ary abjection against the Mo-
late h sc hool board. No hearing
heen set on the petitioners’
' n juncti 60US re< l uest l° r a permanent
=nits . 1° end segregation. The
Board of 1 ^ 8 ^ V ' Mobile County
*ere n j °°l Commissioners et al)
™ March 27 in behalf of 20
?ated _-(hen now attending segre-
° f°°k Mobile. (For back-
°t suits, see SSN, March.)
The fi Parents File Sui t
(breh ji' e ,? un l sv ille parents filed suit
“otrd of e ^° rd et al v - Huntsville
(■- 1,^, 'vacation), contending that
■abarrw ^hool authorities had used
: ' r Petuat S Placement Law to
He ^ segregation. U.S. District
e XDcof j Groom s of Birmingham
ln iun r ,r 6c to hear the motion for
t>Moh? “April-
.1‘ssue >„• 6 su 'l requested the court
C'-ials /"Junctions to prevent school
(Stem” in '""Derating a “dual school
'V° tl tile 6 c °unty “based wholly
C action aCe an< ^ color” of students.
ijAcp /vas filed by New York
b? Jack Greenberg,
Hk a uu Baker Motley and
gained Bel1 Jr-
B 0 ?^ e ^ en hants are the Mobile
!;/,^ tiliam r> School Commission-
J- lack p Crane, Charles E. Mc-
1 ■ K e ‘ , lalee - Arthur Smith
.^h^ord 6 H . Ss With SCh001
; .r- a {* Qr ary and the motion for a
and , Unction ask for speedy
[ finick trial on the merits
of the case. On March 29, Judge Thom
as set April 25 for a hearing on the
motion for a temporary injunction.
A court order is asked to enjoin the
defendants from “continuing to oper
ate a dual school system in Mobile
County based wholly on the race or
color” of students, continuing to as
sign teachers, principals and other
professional personnel to schools on
the basis of race and continuing to
designate certain schools as Negro
schools and certain schools as white
schools.
Also asked is an order to stop the
appropriation of funds for segregated
(See MOBILE, Page 8)
The New York lawyer also told the
court the plan is discriminatory. He
said that while all the pupils are as
signed first to schools on a residential
zone basis, white students can transfer
to white schools but Negro students
cannot.
Greenberg asserted the provisions are
an attempt to “preserve segregation”
and while “voluntary in a sense,” ac
tually are state-enforced.
“I don’t think they can require the
school system to enforce their private
prejudices,” he added.
The lawyer said the Negro plaintiffs
In This Issue
State Reports
Alabama 1
Arkansas 9
Delaware 2
District of Columbia 1
Florida 14
Georgia 15
Kentucky 16
Louisiana 3
Maryland 7
Mississippi 10
Missouri 4
North Carolina 13
Oklahoma 11
South Carolina 14
Tennessee 1
Texas 12
Virginia 5
West Virginia 12
Special Articles
The Region 1
SERS to Prepare Book 4
SSN Receives Award 4
did not “quarrel at present with gen
eral transfer provisions” in Nashville
and other Southern cities, but he said
these also could be “dangerous” if used
to preserve segregation.
“This is a racial rule set down by the
state as to which child is permitted to
transfer,” Greenberg said, referring to
the provision under attack.
Appearing first for the respondents,
Dodson told the court that school zones
had been formed without “gerryman
dering” and without reference to race.
He said no white or Negro student has
been denied a request for transfer.
While he said his appearance was in
behalf of the Davidson County board
of education, he told the high tribunal
he also was “representing the interest”
of the 354 Negroes in the county who
voluntarily transferred back to Negro
schools as well as the 288 white stu
dents who returned to white schools.
Dodson added:
“A basic fallacy in the position of
the petitioners and government is that
an assignment made by the school
board on request of the parents is state
action. There is no difference between
an assignment and permitting a transfer
on request.”
Number of Negroes
In Biracial Schools Up
The attorney also said the number of
Negroes in biracial schools had in
creased from 51 during the first year of
desegregation in 1961 to 185. The sys
tem was ordered by Federal Court to
desegregate the first four grades in
1961, with a grade a year thereafter.
Folwer said the Knoxville board of
education would permit more transfers
to biracial schools if it were convinced
there would be “no disturbance.”
The Knoxville attorney contended
that forcing a student to attend a school
where he was not welcome could re
sult in possible violence. At the least,
he continued, Negroes could be called
bad names and white students in a Ne
gro school could be called “poor white
trash.”
Fowler also told the court that too
rapid desegregation “could lead to the
collapse of the whole thing” as white
people would move to the suburbs. He
(See SUPREME COURT, Page 6)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Celebrezze Expects U. S.
To Operate Base Schools
WASHINGTON
S ecretary of Health, Educa
tion and Welfare Anthony J.
Celebrezze announced March 5
that the new nonsegregated ele
mentary schools which the gov
ernment plans to build on military
installations in segregated South
ern communities “will be fed
erally operated in every sense.”
Celebrezze said arrangements for
operation of the on-base schools will
be made with the Department of De
fense. He ruled out the possibility that
local school boards in communities near
THE REGION
Five School Boards Adopt Plans
F ive public school districts in
the Southern and border
states voluntarily adopted plans
during March for new or addi
tional desegregation, and four
others were ordered by federal
courts to take similar action.
In addition, Negro plaintiffs seeking
desegregation filed federal court suits
against school boards in five districts.
All of the new or accelerated plans
adopted voluntarily are scheduled to
become effective with the opening of
the 1963-64 school year. Four of the
districts are in Kentucky, the other in
Texas.
The Lampasas Independent School
District in Central Texas announced
that it would desegregate next Sep
tember. In Kentucky, similar action
was taken by the Allen County Board
of Education, and the Barren County
Board of Education adopted a plan to
conduct biracial classes in six schools.
Action taken by other Kentucky dis
tricts included the adoption of two pos
sible plans by the Simpson County
Board of Education and a “complete in
tegration” program approved by the
Oldham County Board of Education.
Partial desegregation has been under
way in Oldham County since 1956.
A fifth Kentucky district, Caldwell
County, voted to close an all-Negro
high school in a move interpreted as
paving the way for biracial classes at
the high-school level.
In Louisiana, the Baton Rouge School
Board, under federal court orders to
present a plan before July 5, approved
a staff study of problems and proposals
in connection with desegregation.
Orleans Parish Plan
The Orleans Parish School Board,
which desegregated the first and second
grades under court orders last fall,
designated single, nonracial attendance
districts for the first two grades and
proposed a grade-a-year plan to com
plete desegregation of the system, fol
lowing desegregation of the third
grade in September, 1964. Negro plaint
iffs objected to the plan, still pending in
U.S. District Court.
In response to federal court orders,
the Leon County (Tallahassee) district
in Florida submitted a grade-a-year
plan, effective in September. A federal
judge ordered desegregation of Gates-
ville Independent School District in
Texas’ Coryell County, also beginning
in September.
In Tennessee, U.S. District Judge
Robert L. Taylor approved an accele
rated plan which calls for biracial
classes in both the fifth and sixth
grades in the Knoxville district.
The Lynchburg, Va., district, which
began biracial classes in the first grade
last fall, approved desegregation of the
second and third grades in 1963-64 and,
in compliance with a federal court
order, voted to abolish dual attendance
zones for whites and Negroes.
In Fort Worth, Texas, a federal judge
took under advisement a Negro request
to order a speedup in that district’s
grade-a-year plan scheduled to begin
in September.
A North Carolina federal court
ordered Negro plaintiffs and school of
ficials to formulate a desegregation plan
for Transylvania County.
Two of the five new desegregation
(See FIVE, Page 12)
the military bases will be given the
option of running the federal schools.
Celebrezze’s announcement reversed
an earlier statement by Assistant Sec
retary of HEW James M. Quigley, who
had suggested that the local school
boards might receive federal funds for
operating the on-base schools.
Quigley’s statement had drawn sharp
criticism from the NAACP, the South
ern Regional Council and other anti
segregation organizations which had
charged that the result would be a
three-school system—nonsegregated on-
base schools and separate schools for
whites and Negroes off the military
bases.
Year-Old Decision
Acting under a year-old decision that
segregated schools would be held “un
suitable” to receive federal funds for
educating dependents of government
personnel residing on federal property,
HEW announced in February that on-
base schools would be opened next fall
at Fort Jackson and Myrtle Beach Air
Force Base in South Carolina, Fort
Stewart and Robin Air Force Base in
Georgia, and Fort McClellan and Fort
Rucker in Alabama.
Two more installations—Maxwell Air
Force Base, Alabama, and England Air
Force Base, Louisiana—were added to
the list March 15. The HEW announce
ment said:
“The two school districts affected
were advised in late January of the
department’s intention to build on-base
schools if the districts themselves would
not provide a suitable education.”
In his March 5 announcement, Cele
brezze stressed that the segregated local
school systems will not be given the
opportunity to operate the new on-base
schools “and will not, therefore, receive
any federal funds with respect to the
education of these children.”
Celebrezze said that “with few ex
ceptions,” the government expects chil
dren residing on-base to attend the
new nonsegregated schools He did
not mention on-base high school
students who presumably will con-
(See SCHOOLS, Page 2)
