Arizona sun., 1961-08-10
VIRGINIA HIGH
COURT DECISION
CHALLENGED

Washington, D. c. = The U. 5.
Supreme Court was petitioned this
week to review the cases of "a
Negro students who conducted a
lunch counter "sit-in" in Rich
mond, Va, last year.
In petition for certiorari filed,
July %, attorneys for the NAACP
Legal Defense and Educational
Fund ask the nations highest court
to review an April "a, 1861 decisi-
on by the Supreme Court of APP
peals of Virginia which uphOlds
the students convictions.
The students, who attended Vir-
ginia Union University, demon
strated at Thalhimer's, one OF
Richmond's largest department
stores, on February 20, 1860, and
were arrested and fined $40 each.
They had attempted to obtain
service at two lunch counters, q
soup bar and a restaurant reserv-
ed for white people. The store
maintains a lunch counter for Ne
grOes in its basement.
During the demonstration, which
was entirely peaceful, the Negro
group was refused service and
asked to leave the store. When
they remained, police we're called
and the students were arrested.
Their cases were tried in a
Richmond police court, resulting in
conviction under a Virginia sta
tute which makes it a crime not
to get off private property when
ordered to do so by an owner,
or by someone acting for the
owner.
In subsequent appeals, the con-
Hastings Court in Richmond, and
the aforementioned Virginia SUI
preme Court of Appeals.
The Legal Defense Fund petit
tiOn contends that the Virginia
arrests were motivated by segre-
cation, maintained by state law.
and constituted state enforce
ment of racial discrimination con-
trary to the due process and equal
protection clauses of the Four
teenth Amendment. "
"Thalhimer's,' the attorneys ar
que, "aS a great department store,
is part of the public life of the
community. + & : In choosing to
exclude Negroes from some of
its restaurants, and to expel from
the store all who protest against
this humiliation, Thalhimer's fol-
lowed a policy of public racial
discrimination"
The petition also maintains that
the students, as citizens, have the
right to express themselves "on
topics connected with their rela-
tiOns with the store." and that
these expressions we're at all times
moderate and peaceful.
The Legal Defense Fund attOr-
neys also contend that the con-
victions were obtained without
! clear evidence in any of the cases.
= of notice to petitioners of the au-
: thority, or even the identity. of
! the store employee who ordered
: them out"
The petition attacks the propO-
siti0ns that Z" a man. engaged
in the exercise of his federally
protected right Of free expression.
in a public place where he has
been invited. must at the COM
mand of any casual stranger who
neither Identifies himself, nor
states his authority. either cease
his expression and leave, or run
the chance of successful criminal
,, prosecution"
Though the conviction Of the
, students and their fines are still
in effect, Thalhimer's in January.
: 1861, dropped all color bars in
all of its facilities, including lunch
counters and restaurants.
NAACP Legal Defense Fund at
torneys for the petitioners are
Martin A. Martin and Clarence w.
: Newsome, both of Richmond,
S Va; Thurgood Marshall, Jack
Greenberg, and James M. Nabrit,
r III, of New York City. Charles L.
Black Jr., of New Haven, Conn.
E and Elwood H. ChiSolm of Wash
3 ington, d. C. also assisted in the
preparation Of the petition.