Jackson advocate. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1939-current, 1953-11-28

for conforming to the then estab-
lished precedent free from the sta
/ tutory requirement of rigid racial
segregation"
These rights are personal be-
! cause each appellant is asserting
its individual constitutional right
I to grow up in our democratic So
ciety without impress of state i'm
posed racial segregation in the
| public Schools, the attorneys as
/ serted.
/ The NAACP conclusion states:
"Under the applicable decisions
of this Court the state constitu-
tional and statutory provisions
herein involved are clearly uncon-
stitutional. Moreove1S the histori-
cal evidence surrounding the adop-
ton, submission and ratification
of the Fourteenth Amendment COM
pels the conclusion that it was the
intent, understanding, and contem-
plation that the Amendment pro-
/ scribed all state imposed racial re
strictions. The Negro children in
these cases are arbitrarily excluded
from state public schools set apart
for the dominant white groups.
Such a practice can only be con
tinued on a theory that Negroes,
Qua Negroes, are inferior to all
other Americans. The constitution
al and statutory provisions herein
challenged cannot be upheld with
out a clear determination t h a t
Negroes are inferior and, there
fore, must be segregated from other
human beings. Certainly, such d
ruling would destroy the intent
and purpose Of the Fourteenth
Amendment and the very equalitar-
ian basis Of our government"
The reargument was originally
scheduled before the United States
Supreme Court on October II, but
was postponed at the request of
the Attorney General who asked
for an extension of time.
The filing of the 240~page brief,
with 525 footnotes brings to an end
e hectic weeks of intensive re
search and study on the part of
100 lawyers and experts scattered
across h G country, headed by
Thurgood Marshall, NAACP Spec,
ial Counsel and Director of the LIE
gal Defense and Educational Fund,
Inc, and his assistant, Robert l..
Carter.
Preparation Of the brief was co
ordinated by the NAACP Legal
Defense Fund staff consisting of
Constance Baker Motley, Jack
Greenberg, Elwood Chisolm, David
Pinsky, U. S. Tate, Daniel +. Byrd,
and June Shagaloff, with the as
sistance of Marvin Karpatkin and
Julia Baxter.
In addition to the staff, other
attorneys and legal experts W h 0
worked on the brief were: Charles
l.. Black, Jr., William I. Cole
man, Jr., Charles T. Duncan, George
g. G. Hayes, George M. Johnson,
William R. Ming, Jr., James M. Ma
brit, Jr., Frank d. Reeves, John
Scott, Jack B. Weinstein, Charles
S. Scott, Spottswood w. Robinson,
Ill, and Harold r. Boulware. Also
Professor Walter Gellhorn of CO.
lumbia University School of Law;
Lorgan Miller, Los Angeles, Cali
fornia; and Professor John Frank,
Yale University School of Law.
Included among the other experts
were DR.. John A. Davis, associate
professor of Government at City
College of New York; DR.. Mable
Smythe, Economist, Shiga Univer-
sity, Hikone City, Japan; DR.. AL
fred H. Kelly, Professor of Con-
stitutional History, Wayne Univer-
sity; Howard Jay Graham, Law
Librarian of Los Angeles County
Bar Association; DR.. Horace NJ.
Bond, President of Lincoln Uni
versity; DR.. C. Vann Woodward,
Professor of History, Johns Hop
kins University; Marion Wright,
Professor of Education at Howard
University, DR.. John Hope Frank
lin, Professor of History at How
ard University, Professor Ben Kap-