The Farmville herald. (Farmville, Va.) 1957-current, 1962-03-30

What The Court Decided

w M0C y MC 49,
A federal district court in Vir-
ginia has issued a needed re-
minder that the Supre m e
Courts desegregation decisions
did not order school Indignation.
but simply forbade racial dis
elimination.
In too many instances, such
as the one involving. New Ro-
chelle, N. Y, federal judges
have set themselves up as
school administrators, laying
down arbitrary rules Of school
attendance and race mixing.
This sort Of usmpaion runs
counter to the doctrine laid
Town by the Supreme Court in
IS two major decisions on the
'ubject, one Of May, 1854, the
other Of May, 1855.
The first Of those decisions
aid down the proposition that
compulsory separation Of the
aces in public schools was "a
'enial Of the equal protection Of
he laws. The second decision
charged local federal courts
with upholding that principle,
but said this with respect to
the development Of appropriate
plans:
School authorities have the
primary responsibility for eluci-
iating. assessing and solving
these varied, local SCHOOL,
problems.
In mid-l955. the late Circuit
Judge j. Parker of North Caro-
lima laid down the clearest ex-
position Of what the Supreme
Court had said. and had NOT
said. in the desegregation de-
ciSiOns.
1T has not dec id e d.
wrote Judge Parker, 'that
| the federal courts are to
take over or regulate the
public schools Of the states.
| It has not decided that the
states must mix persons of
different races in the
schools or must require
them to attend schools or
must deprive them of the
right of choosing the schools
| they attend.
| What it has decided, and all
that it has decided, is that a
state may not deny to any per.
son on account Of race the right
to attend any school that ii
maintains. This, under the de-
cision Of the Supreme Court, the
state may not do directly or III
directly; but if the schools
which it maintains are open to
children Of all races, no VIC
lation Of the Constitution is in
volved even though the children
of different races voluntarily at.
tend different schools. as they
attend different churches.
| Nothing in the Constitution
or in the decision of the Su.
preme Court takes away from,
the people freedom to choose
the schools they attend. The
Constitution, in other words
does not require Indignation. Il
merely forbids discrimination
It does not forbid such segre.
cation as occurs as the result Of
voluntary action. It merely for.
bids the use of governmental
power to enforce segregation
The Fourteenth Amendment is a
limitation upon the exercise OF
the power by the state or state
agencies, not a limitation upon
the freedom of individuals.
| All this is pertinent to the
Virginia case of Thompson v.
the Arlington County School
Board. Here the com plain t
charged discrimination because
Negro children residing in a
predominantly Negro atten-
dance area were not permitted
to transfer to other schools of
their choice. whereas white chill
dren residing in the same at
tendance area are permitted to
transfer.
Back of this is an Arlington
County school board ruling
which provided that no child
shall be compelled to attend
school in which his race is in
the minority.
The federal Judge who decided