Document: 379 U.S. 306 85 S.Ct. 384 13 L.Ed.2d 300 Arthur HAMM, Jr., Petitioner,v.CITY OF ROCK HILL. Frank James LUPPER et al., Petitioners, v. STATE ARKANSAS. Nos. 2, 5. Argued Oct. 12, 1964. Decided Dec. 14, Rehearing Denied Jan. 25, 1965. See 995, 698. No. 2: Jack Greenberg, New York City, for petitioner. Constance B. Motley, petitioners. Daniel R. McLeod, Columbia, S.C., respondent. 5: L. Lessenberry, Little Rock, Ark., Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 These are 'sit-in' cases that came here from highest courts South Carolina and Arkansas, respectively. Each those affirmed convictions based upon state trespass statutes against petitioners, who Negroes, participating in demonstrations luncheon facilities retail stores their respective States. We granted certiorari each cases, 377 988, 989, 84 1902, 12 1042 consolidated them argument. The petitioners asserted both denial rights, privileges, immunities secured by Fourteenth Amendment; addition, they claim Civil Rights Act 1964, 78 Stat. 241, passed subsequent to affirmances thereof courts, abated these actions. 2 1. Facts. 3 In Hamm Rock Hill, petitioner, a companion is now deceased, entered McCrory's variety store at Carolina. After making purchases other parts store, proceeded lunch counter sought service. It was refused. manager asked petitioner his associate leave when refused he called police. They were prosecuted convicted under § 16-388 S.C. Code Laws, it an offense anyone enter place business after having been warned not do so or refuse immediately therein. Petitioner's died subsequently. conviction Court General Sessions Supreme Carolina, 241 420, 128 S.E.2d 907 (1962). 4 Lupper 5, involves group Negroes department Gus Blass Company Rock. went mezzanine tearoom busy hour, seated themselves requested service which Within few minutes group, including advised reserved right prepared serve time. Upon being leave, police officers summoned located on first floor arrested them. officers' testimony admitted whole affair denied. prosecutions Municipal resulted 41-1433, Ark.Stat.Ann. (1964 Repl. Vol.), prohibits person remaining premises establishment owner thereof. On appeal Pulaski Circuit Court, trial de novo verdicts guilty Arkansas affirmed, 236 Ark. 596, 367 S.W.2d 750 (1963), sub nom. Briggs State. 5 hold must be vacated dismissed. 1964 forbids discrimination places public accommodation removes peaceful attempts served equal basis category punishable activities. Although conduct present occurred prior enactment Act, still-pending its passage. 6 2. Application Title II Facts Here. 7 treat as involving covered Under statute, defined include one serves offers interstate travelers. Applying rules §§ 201(b)(2), (c)1 we find denied 5-and-10-cent large Hill belonging national chain, sell thousands items public; invites all members into persons, except restricted white persons only. There no contention does come within Act. Likewise area, tearoom, operated Company's dealing extensively commerce. appears record also offered coming but limited persons. argument frankly operation 'probably would' Finally, neither respondent asks remand determine facts coverage counters.2 light such legislative history indicating Congress intended cover counters, see 110 Cong.Rec. 1519-1520, covers McCrory operations. 8 petitioners' could subject prosecutions, federal state, if had statute. 9 includes several sections, some relevant here, create statutory rights.3 201(a) declaring '(a)ll shall entitled full enjoyment goods, services, facilities, advantages, accommodations any accommodation,' have found establishments involved. Next, 203 provides: 10 'No (a) withhold, deny, attempt withhold deprive deprive, privilege section 201 202, (b) intimidate, threaten, coerce, coerce with purpose interfering (c) punish exercising attempting exercise 202.' Emphasis supplied. 11 face, this language prosecution seeking establishment, because race color. has argued, however, victims make use exclusive mechanisms redress grievances, resort extralegal means. agree law generally condemns self-help, 203(c) supports conclusion nonforcible gain admittance remain immunized prosecution, statute speaks 'right privilege' earlier provisions. availability defense punishment solely pursue remedies. specifically notes would criminal trespass, breach peace similar prosecutions. Senator Humphrey, bill Senate, said explaining bill: 'This plainly means defendant peace, case can assert rights created 202 State Courts entertain defenses grounded * *' 9767. effect application laws way Supremacy Clause, Art. VI, cl. requires result where 'there clear collision' between law, Kesler Department Safety, 369 153, 172, 82 807, 818, 641 (1962), conflict otherwise valid enactment, Florida, 325 538, 65 1373, 89 L.Ed. 1782 (1945). question 203(c). command clearly direct conflict. only judgments rendered, finalized, before 14 4. Effect Prosecutions. 15 Last Term, Bell Maryland, 378 226, 1814, 822, noted existence body review time rendered longer unlawful abate. consider convictions, then import fact convictions. think federal, 16 doctrine earliest expression Chief Marshall's United States Schooner Peggy, Cranch 103, 110, 49 (1801): 17 'But judgment decision appellate court, intervenes positively changes rule governs, obeyed, obligation If constitutional I know court contest obligation. true mere private individuals, will ought struggle hard construction will, retrospective operation, affect parties, great concerns (the law) always receive conforming manifest import. decide according existing laws, necessary set aside judgment, rightful cannot violation aside.' 18 arguably rested premise appeals admiralty trials novo, prize litigation applied trial, Yeaton States, 281, 283, 101 (1809); Use Washington County Baltimore & O.R. Co., How. 534, 552, 714 (1845); Tynen, Wall. 88, 95, 20 153 (1871); Reisinger, 398, 401, 99, 32 480 (1888); Chambers, 291 217, 222-223, 54 434, 435, 763 (1934); Massey 608, 532, 1019 (1934), later quite different contexts, supra; supra. reason stated Hughes, Chambers: 'Prosecution crimes enforcement and, continues, continue vivify it.' 436. Chambers left open final ratification Twenty-first Amendment, petition thereafter, extension taken per curiam supra, handed down shortly Chambers. 19 apparent exemplified depend imputation specific intention particular None cited drew reference problem Rather, principle takes more general form imputing avoid inflicting further purpose, unnecessarily vindictive. This principle, expressed rule, read wherever applicable part background acts. Thus, deem irrelevant made allusion enacting Nor believe provisions saving 61 635, U.S.C. 109 (1958 ed.), nullify abatement conviction. cause removed repeal punitive certain this. U.S., 224, 434 n. identical originally enacted 1871, 432. meant obviate technical illustrated Tynen decided 1871. substitution new greater schedule penalties held abate previous prosecution. contrast, works abatement. substitutes crime. So drastic change well beyond narrow amendment repeal. clear, therefore, abated. 21 distinction without difference.4 Congress, far-reaching comprehensive scheme, operate less effectively run-ofthe-mill repealer. Since follows same prevail Clause contrary practice give way. Here intervened either attack finalized. Just follow Rather than retroactive intrusion long-standing namely, since crime application, virtue normal covering pending arising out pre-enactment activity. civil legislation obliterate distressing chapter our history. demands strike inconsistent purposes 22 Far finding bar involved, statutory. required Constitution. (1962); Future unconstitutional there clause itself, violations equally necessarily follows. 23 persuasive reasons intent insulate As said, two Presidents recommended legislation, eradicate unhappy behalf embodied land. theory property violated. However, supposed discriminate race, least establishments, nullified circumstances actionable nature acts viewed purpose. 24 yet another applying construction. view power extend immunity Some might say permit stand commerce justified adoption But even true, firmly imbedded jurisprudence proper every working repealer legislation. Where sets regulate situation power, Constitution affords wide choice whether exercised here. did pass benefit operates own force where, used enforce pattern racial discrimination. noted, Justices joining Amendment operate; others opinion. point free doubt, ample favoring interpretation renders unnecessary. 25 short, declared policy country prohibit therein defined, interest And accordance long-established therefore charges ordered ordered. 26 Judgments 27 DOUGLAS, whom GOLDBERG joins, concurring. 28 my Brethren raise doubts about sit-in demonstrators passage My Brother HARLAN observes difficult see, absence evidence how 'giving past placing burden commerce,' post, p. 325. merely note that, am faced difficulty. That because, concurring opinions Heart Atlanta Motel, Inc. 291, 279, 375, 369, has, passing remove burdens commerce; protect discriminatory treatment, accommodation. certainly appropriately conclude interference should halt permitted insist punishing whose 'crime' assertion right, albeit put imprimatur whenever arose. 29 BLACK, dissenting. 30 validly, think,1 restaurants thereafter food colored people interprets prosecute convict violated idea accomplish precedent, far know, nearly 200 years existence. 31 shows Lupper, tables demonstration, so. says 'could statute.' understand what covers2 authorizing unlawfully 'right' take hands sitting occupying long choose stay. chief disputes streets provide adequate orderly judicial remedy. Even assuming, let forcibly them, holding compel like lawless occurring passed. 318, 822 (dissenting opinion). judge-made 'common rule' relies heretofore another—not, points out, restrictions still old common-law alone century ago 'saving' keep retroactively, unless expressly says: 33 'The release extinguish penalty, forfeiture, liability incurred repealing provide, treated sustaining action liability. 34 plain face—it prevent never entertained. broad, remedial Great Northern Co. 208 452, 313, 52 567; 480; Ulrici, Dillon Fed.Cas. 328 (No. 16,594) (C.C.E.D.Mo.) (opinion Miller circuit), fair reading broad enough wipe designed away with, sort superiority over congressionally statutes.3 763, 1019, cites authority disregarding involved course supersedes Congress. 223-224, 435. By today's discovery 'long-established cases,' back spelling expressly, hereafter want upset crimes, renounced 100 35 Furthermore, grave doubt acting Commerce Necessary Proper unprecedented step abating Yet judicially declares served' upholding trespassers, thought bodies decide. Ferguson Skrupa, 372 726, 83 1028, 93. 36 early days lightly intrude Cohens Virginia, Wheat. 264, 443, 257, 1821, John Marshall speaking said: 37 'To interfere penal State, levelled legitimate powers Union, sole object internal government country, very serious measure, adopt lightly, inconsiderately. motives weighty. deliberately, unequivocally expressed. 38 'An act, consideration not, think, construed imply intention, render inevitable.' 39 Nothing makes Court's 'inevitable' supportable, nor justifies offhand carrying 'legislative purpose'. For paragraph, sentence, clause, word most strained efforts fertile imagination support conclusion. perhaps extensive careful ever compiled, thoroughly discussed debated bills millions words written tens pages contained volumes weighing half hundred pounds, conceivable aspect ad infinitum, once single sponsor, proponent opponent intimate hope express fear gives today. 40 HARLAN, 41 holds remarkable finds authority. 42 basically canon conceived yardstick determining legislature, noncriminal proscribed end nonfinal former effect, establishes presumption legislature demonstrated intent, evidenced, example, congressional enactments statute,1 480. 153: 43 'By 13th act 1813 proceedings fell. legal conviction, pronounced creating offence repealed.' 44 origins English common e.g., Rex Cator, Burr. 2026, 98 Eng.Rep. 56; King Davis, Leach Crown Cases (3d ed), 168 238, embraced American jurisprudence. 45 useful appropriate framework political sovereignty. strikes jarring note, sovereignty, Our system tolerates differences policies,2 exculpation readily attaches unreservedly repeals cannot, opinion, automatically embrace exoneration wrongdoing statute.3 46 suggests jurisdiction. Until today respect e. g., 101. relied character. 47 vehicle extending bounds. provision play appeared itself setting Congress' displace prospective applications touching matters concerned. me, appear unmistakable terms, represent wholly 48 entirely BLACK'S poignant observations score; scintilla remotely revoluntionary mind. Section 1104 indeed provides nothing 'construed invalidating thereof.' Whether 'racial trespasses' effective date deemed Act,4 unnecessary juncture, inconsistency situations justify attributing pre-empt instances. Moreover, confront us questions gravest import, barren showing giving commerce.5 Such evidence, least, prerequisite validity purported regard. 348; Katzenbach McClung, 294, 8k 377. is, indeed, indicate adverted question. 50 avoidance questions, ante, 316. reach extent enabling fabricate nonconstitutional grounds cloth. 51 "A construed, fairly possible, unconstitutional, score.' Jin Fuey Moy, supra (241 394, 658, 659, 60 1061). difficulty pressed disingenuous evasion.' Moore Ice Cream Rose, 289 373, 379, 53 620, 622, 77 1265 (Cardozo, J.).6 Concluding abated, affirm given Black dissenting 1864, joined. STEWART, difference rather while review. asserts principles decisional law. proceeds apply through provided disposition Clause. silent subject, unable subscribe reasoning. 55 State's determine. supervening compelling proceedings, 56 Maryland 'open arguable' issue clearer. Like counterpart. apparently repealed pending. Spencer, 177 346, 181 S.E. 217. 57 vacate reconsideration 58 WHITE, 59 Absent was, view, infirmity Black). confident silence void outstanding courts. reasons, much do. wrong impute unusual poses problems passed, forcefully raised status believe, books, remitting matter did, unstated erase reversed stands indicator Congressional seems me exactly opposite reached ratify massive disobedience often attended violence, feel sure language. truth rhetoric blame Given discernable decision, happy it, task do, absent limitations. case. groups engage nonviolent disagree defies categorial answer guidance individual circumstance. wholesale sanction calls answer. 201: '(b) following meaning title operations '(2) restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, counter, soda fountain, facility principally engaged selling consumption premises, including, to, '(c) travelers *.' brief says, 'a reap benefits.' At 13. 3. Provisions substantive i.e., freedom included guarantees position creates 822; No manner. deal dealt finalizing Because Act's felt allowed Here, intervening judge desirable. 268, S.Ct., 363. Sections 201-203, 243-244, 2000a 2000a-2 ed.). that: prosecution.' Ante, 314. statement history, decisions it. ed.): expiration temporary liability.' accept 1-103, 1-104, 109, expresses save Lupper. Mack Connor, 220 Ga. 450, 139 286 (Ga.Sup.Ct.1964). Cf. remand, Md. 356, 204 A.2d 54; rehearing deferred 'awaiting outcome issues Court,' obviously referring cases. quoted 321. Quoted pp. 310-311. Amendment. International Association Machinists Street, 740, 797, 81 1784, 1141 (Frankfurter, J., dissenting).

Category: 1