Evening star., 1954-05-28
High Court on Segregation

Your editorial Of May 18 entitled
Comply With the Law Of the Land"
says In parts: What the superintendent
Of schools and the members Of the
board need is the advice Of counsel as
to how quickly and how far they may
go In conforIpilg to the new law Of the
land "a. )" This seems to be over
simplifying The matter. May we ask
what counsel may be considered quail
fed to give advice as to how the
Supreme Courts revolutionary "new
law" shall be conformed to or enforced?
It Is true that the nine justices have
given their personal ruling upsetting
the Supreme Courts ruling of 1896
regarding equal but separate facilities,
and have given their personal interpre-
tation Of the amendment Of 1868. and
have annulled the law passed by the
Congress requiring segregation within
the District Of Columbia, but, under
our Constitution. the nine political ap-
pointees have no legislative authority
to give the country 'new law" to-
gether with their personal interpreta-
tion as to how their revolutionary 'new
law shall be adapted and enforced In
various jurisdictions Of the country
The court may declare law to be un-
constitutional. but it cannot make a
new law" and then dictate how the
law shall be enforced.
The people of this land are SELF
governing people. The people have dele
gated the law-making power to the
Congress only, and they expect the
laws Of the land. and provisions for
their enforcement to be made by their
duly-elected representatives in the
congress-not by nine political ap-
pointees.
It is shocking to learn that the nine
political appointees now make new
laws" for this broad land! The nine
justices have shown conclusively in the
past that they are men Of only normal
ability. Of very limited experience de-
spite their advanced years, and some
Of them are woefully lacking in any
previous judicial experience. while the
Congress Is representative Of every Sec
ton Of the country and well qualified
for the legislative power entrusted to 1t
by the people.
We cannot believe the Congress to be
so lacking in moral courage as to permit
its legislative powers to be usurped by
nine political appointees.
The people have faith In the Con-
greSs. They expect it to guard its legiS-
lative powers and functions. The peo-
pie realize that our country is only as
strong as is the moral fiber Of our
Congress. Frank Davis.
The rights of the States have long
since been packed away in mothballs,
and with this latest ruling vaniShes the
last vestige of hope for freedom from
a totally centralized government. For
when the States that comprise the Ma
ton must rewrite their laws to conform
to the decision Of q nine-man court,
that is Capitalization in its most clear
cut form.
Which Of our freedoms of individu-
ality will be next to go on the pretext
Of furthering democracy? When the
Federal Government takes away the
authority Of local laws, made to con-
form to local situations, Is this de- /.
mocracy?
Eleanor L. Bisley.
I sincerely hope and pray that the.
integration decision OF the Supreme
Court is not the beginning Of the end
for all our freedoms.
Freedom of choice and local govern
ment lost. Equality under the law won.
Equality under the law does not neces-
state the abolition Of any one Of our
freedoms. Equality is none the less
equality when the Federal Government
takes away freedom Of every citizen.
Equality can spell justice. On the
other hand, equality can spell tyranny.
HmaliAna HE Richter
It is unfortunate that the long-estab-
lished Federal system Of government
under which the United States rose to
the heights as q great Nation has been
abolished. In its place is powerful
central government which will in years
to come, If nothing Is done, transcend
all State lines In every walk of life.
In fact, very gradually 1t could lead
into an oligarchy, or dictatorship.
which the federal system would have
prevented.
SOutherner.
In the Supreme Court anti-segrega-
ton decision it is difficult to believe
that in this land of boasted demo-
cratic processes in which the majority
10 OuPROoC0 w 40AOS q AAAAAAOAAVJ 40 eSSAS
to bring pressure enough to bear on
the President. the Attorney General
and nine other men to impose their
will upon the majority.
The sympathieS of Americans have
always been aroused where injustices
have been imposed upon children, and
yet, in this decision. the children are
the ones imposed upon and are made
the unwilling subjects Of an objection
able social order because they are not
in q position to defend themselves.
Harry G. Spielman.
To discuss the effect Of the recent
Supreme Court decision declaring seq
regation in public schools unconstitu-
tional, there was joint meeting on
= D ( I. 9 q