Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-11-17
Delay Sought in Test
Of Segregation Laws
Virginia Argues
One Judge Cont
Rule on Issue
BY ALEX r. PRESTON
Star stan Correspondent

NOHtOLh, va, NOV. H.
Virginia today sought postpone
ment Of court test of the
States new laws to preserve
racial segregation in public
schools.
Federal District Judge Walter
E. Hoffman began hearing argu-
ments on the States motions
to dismiss desegregation suits
filed by Negroes against the
Norfolk and Newport News
School Boards.
Attorney General j. Lindsay
Almond, jr., and associate coun-
sci representing the two cities,
argued that Judge Hoffman,
alone, cannot pass on the consti-
nationality of a new pupil as
signment plan.
The assignment plan is part
Of a package Of legislation en-
acted by a special session of the
General Assembly last Septem-
Der. The State argued that the
Negroes had not availed them
selves Of the system of admins
trative remedies provided for in
the new law.
Contested as Invalid
Oliver w. Hill and Spottswood
Robinson III, counsel for the
National Association for the Ad-
vancement Of Colored People,
and local attorneys representing
the compliments argued that the
pupil assignment law is invalid
on its face"
The Negro attorneys said the
constitutional issues already had
been ruled on by the Supreme
Court and that Judge Hoffman
is qualified to act on the motions
to dismiss and their original
petition to restrain the school
boards of the two cities from
denying admission to schools on
the basis of race.
Under rules of Federal pro-
cedure three judges must pass
on constitutional questions. The
States new school laws were
enacted after the original suits
were filed. That State later
amended its defense to use the
pupil assignment plan as a
ground for dismissal.
Somewhat the same question
whether one or three judges
could rule on the validity Of the
new State law-was left up in
the air Wednesday. At that time,
Federal District Judge Sterling
Hutchinson at Richmond took
under Amusement the same basic
issue. He is expected to rule
after two weeks.
Difference in Cases
But there are some significant
differences between the facts in
volved here and the Prince Ed
ward case.
On Wednesday, Judge Hutche-
son expressed concern over the
fact that a part of the new
State school laws provides for
automatic withholding of State
funds from a locality with inte-
grated schools. At the same
time, he observed, the Prince
Edward County supervisors have
publicly stated they will not APP
propriate local funds for inte-
grated schools. with the result
that the schools would be closed
In Norfolk, however, the City
Council has issued a statement
saying that it will continue to
operate its schools here. entirely
out Of locally-raised tax funds
II the State holds back its share
due to indignation.
During debate on the school
legislation in the General As
sembly. those supporting the
program of Gov. Stanley said
the is separate school bills, OPP
Grating as whole, would make it
impossible for indignation to
occur anywhere in the State.
Viewpoint Challenged
During arguments on the
Prince Edward case Wednesday.
however. Attorney T. Justin
Moore, counsel for the county.
said the laws would allow a
locality to have integrated
schools, but without State aid.
Judge Hoffman. a native of
Norfolk, was the Republican can
didate for Governor three years
ago. He was on the ticket with
State Senator Ted Dalton. the
9. o. p. candidate for Governor
who polled about As per cent OF
the vote.
sggssass3. .sas ~ ss's5 Ia ~