Evening star., 1954-05-17


The time and attention the
Supreme Court devoted to the
school segregation issue and the
widespread public interest it at
tracted demonstrated that the
elements mixed in the cases were
as deep-rooted and far-reachine
as any that have confronted the
court in at least century.
Besides the extremely complex
problem of constitutional law
and the almost equally intricate
matters of equity for every one
concerned. the arguments last
December. as well as in Decem-
ber, 1852, delved into the rights
of States and the spread of Fed
eralism. They touched on civil
rights and long fixed patterns Of
community life. They revived
disputes over legislative and ju-
dicial power. They were tinged
with politics no less than with
considerable public feeling. And,
from q precedent standpoint,
they challenged q 5S-year-old
ruling by the Supreme Court it
self.
The separate but equal doc
trine. originally stated by the
Supreme Court in 1896. has
hitherto been sustained or at
least was never specifically re-
versed. In more recent years
the tribunal so frightened its in
depreciation as to render racial
segregation at the college and
university level almost impos-
sible. If not specifically illegal.
The District case was de-
scribed as the first of its kind
to present q clear-cut issue In
asking the Supreme Court to
rule that racial segregation. as
such. in public schools here is
unconstitutional. Opponents Of
segregation contended that the
Federal Government. in provid-
ing educational opportunities
and facilities in the District. may
not constitutionally or legally
compel such separation Of the
races.
Began in 1850.
The case began in September,
1850. when several Negro chill
dren were refused admission to
the Sousa Junior High School.
Under the sponsorship of a Con-
Solidated Parents League, suit
was filed in the U. s. District
Court for the District Of Colum-
bia. The petition sought a ruling
that the school authorities were
without right in constituting the
(educationaD statutes in the
District as to require exclusion Of
the children" from the Sousa
school in violation Of their rights
under the due process clause Of
the Fifth Amendment.
Judge Walter M. Bastian
granted the District School
Boards motion to dismiss the
complaint in April, 1851. Attor-
neys for the children appealed
to the United States Court of APP
peals for the District Of Colum-
bia. Meanwhile, late in 1852, the
Supreme Court agreed to hear
the appeal directly along with
those from the four States.
Seen as Congressional Issue.
District authorities denied that
the segregated public school sys-
tenn here goes contrary to the
Constitution or congressional en-
actments. They told the Supreme
Court that any change in the
system was matter to be deter
mined by Congress and not by
the courts. They cited a series Of
statutes between 1862 and 1866,
re-enacted in 1874. as providing
for the dual setup.
They contended that congress
sional intent" during the past
80 years has consistently been to
treat the Districts segregated
system as an established fact
and that Congress was within
its constitutional authority in
passing and maintaining those
laws.
Opponents Of segregation in
school here did not press any
claim Of inequality Of educa-
tional facilities. They urged the
Supreme Court to rule that
segregation is discrimination Of
the sort that deprives Negroes
Of fundamental rights Of citizens.
causes genuine injury" to
Negroes. is against national
policy. and that, even If school
officials properly acted under the
laws. the laws themselves should
be voided.
Other Cases.
In the Virginia case, the
Supreme Court was asked to
reverse a March (1952) decision
by a three-judge Federal Court
which, in effect. upheld segrega-
ton in high schools in Prince
Edward County. The lower court
ordered the county to equalize
facilities with all reasonable
dispatch and diligence"
In the South Carolina case. q
three-judge Federal Court said
school authorities in Clarendon
County were complying with an
earlier order to equalize facil-
tiles "aS soon as humanity pos
sible." In this 2-to-1 decision
in June. 1851. the lower court
stated that mo good can be
accomplished for any one by
ordering immediate abolition Of
segregation"
No Constitutional Violation.
In the Kansas case. a three
judge Federal Court observed In
August. 1851. that racial segre-
cation was detrimental" to
Negro pupils but that q Kansas
permissive law, as applied in
Topeka schools, did not violate
the 14th amendment to the