Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1958-09-17

ling In mind also their rela-
tive academic standing, adap-
liability could hardly bar
them"
The court, he said, could find
no grounds TO uphold the
school boards rejection of
these four,
Judge Bryan refused TO throw
out the entire assignment plan
used by Arlington. and actually
did not throw out any one of
the criteria used-although he
made 1t clear that the adapta-
bility factor would have to be
weighed carefully II it is 10
stand up.
Attorneys for the Negro stu
dents had commended that Ar
lington's use Of the assignment
plan was in itself discrimina-
ton, To this. Judge Bryan
said:
with this the court dis
agrees. True, previously no
such tests we're known. They
came into being in the latter
part of August, 1858, in con-
nection with the instant school
assignments. But this does not
prove discrimination.
Not Used Earlier
These tests were not used
previously because there was no
necessity. The removal Of the
rule and custom Of segregation
was an abrupt change. 1t was
a social epoch beginning a new
era. Accommodation to its de-
mands meant new methods as
well as facilities. The assign
ment of pupils took on added
obligation. At some time and
place, assignment regulations
had to be adopted. Therefore,
the instant criteria are not dis
|crimmatory as born of a social
change. Otherwise, after the
|erasure of race of factor in pu-
.pil placement, no assignment
plan could ever be validly
adopted"
In the 15-page opinion which
is to be followed later by a
formal decree Judge Bryan me-
ticulously went over arguments
on each of the criteria used in
passing on the Negro applica-
tons.
Attendance area. overcrowd-
ing at Washington-Lee and
academic accomplishment are
clearly valid criteria free Of
faint of race or color" said
Judge Bryan.
Other Problems Disregarded
Another factor which the
school board called psychology
cal problems was disregarded,
because the psychologist who
made the conclusions did not
appear as a witness. All appli-
cations which were rejected in
this category, however, had
been rejected in other cate
gories. Thus its rejection by
Judge Bryan on technical
grounds had no effect on the
number Of students named in
the indignation ruling.
At the end of his opinion
Judge Bryan had an addendum
in which it was implied that he
was attempting to give the
State guidance in solving the
race dilemma. He said:
1.-The length and detail of this
statement were necessary to
assure care and solicitude for
the actions Of State and local
administrative agencies. 1t is
an effort. too, to establish for
cases Of this character some
design for decision"
Judge Bryan heard the case
September 2 through 4. The
beginning of the fall term in
Arlington, originally scheduled
for September 4, was put off
until September 8 because of
the litigation. Glasses began
on a segregated basis after
Judge Bryan told the school
board he had no objection to
the status quo being maintained
while he weighed the case.
Three Major Issues
The case revolved around
these major issues:
/. Whether the State Pupil
Placement Board or Arlington
School Board should pass on
the Negro applications.
2. If the Negroes do not have
to use the State placement
procedure, is the local assign
ment plan used by the Airing
ton School Board valid?
3. If the local plan is valid,
did the school board act in an
arbitrary and capricious man.
ner in passing on the individual
assignments?
REAHTINN