Evening star., 1954-11-25

2 l5a
be jolloDed In sending the
school segregation cases back
to the Federal District Courts
IN order to effect integratio1,
as rapidly as the particular
circumstances permit:
II is clear that no single for
inula or blueprint is readily slls-
ceptible Of application to all To-
calities which must end segre-
cation in their school systems.
The measures essential to bring
ing about an expeditions, orderly,
and effective transition in any
given area will depend on the
special conditions and problems
in that area. And since there Is
wide variance In local conditions.
what may be practicable in one
community may be wholly inap-
propriate in another.
A prerequisite to the formula
ton, initiation and supervision
of any practicable program for
ending segregation is a knowledge
of the special problems and needs
Of the particular community.
It is the responsible school au-
thorities and the courts of first
instance in each area who will
have the greatest familiarity with
local conditions and who will be
In the best position to evaluate
their significance and effect in
accomplishing desegregation. in
as short a period as feasible. .
For this reason, this court
should not, either itself or
with the assistance of a special
master appointed by it, delineate
the precise steps that each of the
defendants should take in end
ing segregation in the public
school systems. Instead, the pri-
mary responsibility for both de-
vising and carrying out programs
for the expeditions accomplish
ment of the required transition
should be placed upon the de-
PENDANTS, to be exercised under
the continuing direct supervision
Of the District Courts or appro-
pirate State courts.
Court Urged as Guide.
This court, we believe, should
lay down standards for the
guidance of the lower courts in
carrying out its decision. A re-
mand for further proceedings,
without more, would add To the
uncertainty and doubt which al
ready exist and would only serve
to make the process of adjust
ment more difficult.
Specifically, the lower courts
should be instructed to require
the defendants either to admit
the plaintiffs, and other Negro
children similarly situated
forthwith to public schools on
q nonsegregated basis or to pro-
pose promptly, for the courts
consideration and approval, an
effective program for accom-
plishing the transition as soon
as practicable. .s5s.
In passing upon the accept
ability Of proposed programs, the
criterion should be whether the
defendants have sustained the
burden of showing that their
particular program will bring
about the total elimination of
racial considerations in the ad-
mission of pupils to public
schools as rapidly as local con-
ditions allow. And in determin-
Ing whether the projected plan
represents the most expeditions
means Of accomplishing an ef-
fective transition, the courts
should be permitted to take into
account the scope of the admin
istrative adjustments that are
called for and the particular
conditions existing In the COM
munity.
Where there are no solid OBJ
stacles to desegregation, delay is
not justified and should not be
permitted. It is only where the
lower court finds, upon clear
and convincing evidence, that
the defendants have met the
burden Of showing that immedi-
ate Il. e., at the beginning Of
the next school term) completion
OF the desegregation program
is inpracticable. that any delay
is justiflable. And, in such a
situation, the district court
SHOULD fix the shortest practi-
cable period for completing de-
segregation.
Although it would be helpful
II this courtecould specify OUT
side limits for the period of de-
segregation, we do not think it
would be feasible to do so at
this time. Apart from the fact
that there Is no way of judging
at this point what integration
will involve in the particular
area maximum periods tend to
become minimum periods.
This court should not enter
any order which might have the
practical effect of slowing down
desegregation where ii could be
swiftly accomplished. The court,
however. should make it clear
that any proposal for desegre-
cation over an indefinite period
will be unacceptable. and that
there can be no justification any
where for failure to make an
immediate and substantial start
toward desegregation, In a good
faith effort to end segregation
as soon as feasible.
Further, the lower courts
should be instructed to be in
sistent that any interval per-
mitted for the accomplishment
OF desegregation is being fully
utilized. Any period during which
little or nothing is being done
to further the transition would
serve no useful purpose and, in
deed, would only intensity the
difficulties.
Whnthnr fiy,oa will Ln ,,rnf,,1