Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Portland observer. (Portland, Or.) 1970-current | View Entire Issue (Aug. 9, 1979)
Portland Observer Thursday, August 9,1979 Page 3 4B ** A »v'W-" John J. S co tt Assistant Regional Solicitor U.S. Department of the Interioi Atlanta, Georgia Charles S. Scott Scott, Scott, Scott & Scott Topeka, Kansas Hon. Harold R. Boulware Judge, Family Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit Columbia, South Carolina Oliver W. Hill Hill, Tucker b Marsh Richmond, Virginia A Louis L. Redding Professor Charles W. Quick University of Illinois College of Law Champaign, Illinois Private Pratico Wilmington, Delaware Hon. Constance Baker Motley Judge, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York New York, N.Y. Black Bar honors civil rights attorneys I H ^J A S • L) A M A A The N a tio n M a l I Bar Association honored the NAACP and ten o f the attorneys who took part in the Brown v Board o f Education case twenty-five years ago at its national convention in Los Angeles last week. Unable to attend was U.S. Thurgood Marshall who was chief counsel for the NAACP for the Brown cases. The convention - the first time the attorneys had been together fo r many years — provided an oppor tunity to remeber the past, analize the impact o f Brown and assess the future o f school desegregation. m m a a a a a a m Kansas The Brown decision involved five cases, but received its name from the Brown case because it reached the U.S. Supreme Court first. John and Charles Scott o f Scott, Scott, Scott, and Scott, one o f the few Black fa m ily law firm s, represented 23 children and parents in Topeka, Kansas. Kansas had a unique law that did not require segregation but allowed larger districts to segregate. The o riginal plan fo r the suit was to prove that the schools provided for Blacks were in fe rio r to those for w hites, but Jack Greenberg and Robert C arter o f the N A A C P National O ffice, which sponsored the case, told them to challenge the separate but equal law and attempt to show that separate schools are inherently unequal. In 1951, the federal court upheld the constitutionality o f segregation but ruled that “ segregation o f white and colored children in the public schools has detrim ental effect on colored c h ild re n .” The N A A C P asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case and it was argued be fore the high court by Robert Carter. Prior to 1950, all school cases were efforts to force conpliance with the Plessy v Ferguson (separate but equal) ruling. A t its 1950 National Convention the NAACP determined to push a case to the U.S. Supreme Court to persue that end. However, T hurgood M arshall and C arter decided the effort should be an all o ut attack on segregation — to determine that wherever segregation is found it is unequal. They believed that Plessy could be reversed and segregation laws fo un d uncon stitutional. Delaware Louis L. Redding filed two cases in the state court o f Delaware. A Black parent came to him to ask his help to arrange for her child to ride the white school bus to her school. She attended a Black school 1V4 miles away and the bus passed her home and the school. When the superintendent and the state superin tendent refused to allow her to ride. Redding decided “ the best way to get the kid on the bus was to get the kid in the school where the bus was going.“ The second case dealt with Black students in Claymont who had no school so had to go to school in Wilmington. He argued that this was a violation o f the 14th Amendment. Judge C olling L. Seitz said he could not override the Supreme Court separate but equal decision, but ordered that the Black students be admitted to white schools because their own schools were inferior. This was the first order to admit Black students to a white school that was put into effect. The State Board o f Education appealed to the State Supreme Court and lost and Black children entered the previously all- white schools without incident. The State appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Virginia In 1950, Barbara Johns, a senior at Prince Edward School in Virginia led her class to boycott for improved conditions in their school - a tar paper shack. The class asked Oliver W. H ill to represent them in a suit against the school district. “ I went to .• V .'.n ■ • ■ >.• *« 1 1 . , 1 ■ talk with them and found they were so sincere and so well organized that 1 couldn’t turn them down.” This case, for the first time, in cluded expert witnesses in the fields o f psychology, psychiatry, sociol ogy, anthropology and education to testify as to the harmful effects o f segregation. Blacks lived segregated lives, had no rights and were in constant fear, but "N e groe s always resented segregation and did what they could to elevate their situation.” The court determined that the Black schools were vastly in fe rio r, but upheld the c o n s titu tio n a lity o f segregation and ordered that white and Black schools be equalized. In the appeal lawyers argued that equal educational opportunités involved more than equal physical facilities and curricula. South Carolina Harold R. Bouleware was attorney for the first o f the Brown cases tried. The law o f South Caroline said “ no child o f either race shall ever be per mitted to attend a school provided fo r children o f the other race.” Black parents o f Clarendon County, after making several appeals to the school board, file d suit in 1950 asking for equal facilities. The com plaint was later changed to ask for abolishment o f segregation, but the court ordered the state to provide equal facilities. An appeal was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to hand down a ru lin g as to whether racial separation in elemen ta ry and highschools is a con stitutionally possible pattern. W ashington. D.C. Charles Houston, special counsel to the N AACP and former Dean o f the H ow ard Law S chool, filed B olling v Sharpe in W ashington, D.C. asking enforcement o f Plessy. When he became ill, Dr. James M. Nabrit was called to take over the case and he amended it to challenge segregation. The case alleged that the refusal o f the W ashington, D.C. school board to allow Black children to attend a white school on the basis o f race violated the 5th Amendment. The case was dismissed by the District Court (which also appointed the school board) and while it was pending appeal the U.S. Supreme Court indicated that it would hear the casewith the other four. Dr. Herbert Reid, Sr. "W ha t we were trying to do was to attack a very, very vicious system o f segregated education. Busing is an effective tool to bring about the im plementation o f integration. It is im portant to remember that busing was not discovered fo r integration. We got on the bus a long time ago.” Charles Scott " T h e courts have consistently upheld desegregation and busing in most cases. When it comes to en forcement by government agencies, that is a problem.” Oliver W. H ill: “ This arguement that it is an in sult to say Negro children have to be closely identified with white children to receive an education is bunk. We know you don’t have to go to school w ith w hite c h ild re n to get an education. But, the only way poor whites, Chicanos, Negroes and any other m in ority w ill ever have the same facilities as they provide for the more affluent children is to be in school with them. They are going to provide fo r their children and the only way you are going to get equal facilities on a consistent basis is to be there so when they p ro vid e an education for their children you are close enough to get it to. Otherwise you are going to get an in fe rio r education for the poorer elements o f society.” " A sign in a busing parade in .í, • , \ Dr. Jamas M . Nabrit, Jr. President Emeritus Howard University Washington, D.C. Richmond said, ‘ I t ’ s not the bus, it’s the niggers’ . Still the primary objec tion is inherent racism in this country that manifests itself in anti-busing. IF they would decide they are going to provide a good education fo r children and put their minds and hearts to it, we wouldn’ t have the public objection to busing.” Jack Greenberg Director - Counsel NAACP Legal Defense Fund New York, NY Regarding the resistance o f school d is tric ts to the B row n decision: "There are some damn racist people in this country that don’ t give a damn about the C onstitution.” I » » A Arthur D. Shores Shores Et Larkin Birmingham, Alabama Dr. Herbert O. Reid. Sr. Professor, Howard University Law Srhnn) The Moms Marks House 1501 SW Horrison Sheer Portland 97201 Telephone 227-2688 John Scott: “ I f we could have, and we w ill, in tegrated schools and raised chilren in a climate where all people are equal, then in time we would do away with segregation in this country and in the world. “ It is a continuing problem. At every turn o f the road there may be a block and we have to put that block aside. That is what we intend to do, not only legally, but with every asset and with every ability that we have.” Dr. James M. Nabrit, Jr. “ To understand the current con troversy over busing, we have to un derstand how this developed. We had a situation that consisted o f segregation in every aspect o f life. That segregation was legal - based on Plessy v Ferguson - which said that as long as whatever was done was done separately but equally, it was constitutional. Under this law our whole lives were separate. It didn't make any difference how many faci lities we got. I f they were unequal, we went into court; we proved that they were unequal. They made them equal and as soon as that was over they made them unequal again. It was a continuous process over which we had no control. “ The only way we got control o f it was to take another theory, and that was that segregation per se was un constitutional. No matter whether the facilities were equal, and no mat ter if facilities for Blacks were better. I f it was segregation o f people because o f race, then it was uncon stitutional. "T h a t was the premis upon which we argued the Brown cases, because in those cases they had separate but equal. They really preferred to argue the separate but equal doctrine. “ Now these things have come up ■ Bakke and Weber - but none o f the cases say that the d o ctrin e that segregation per se is unconstitutional is wrong. What they say is that the remedies are u n c o n s titu tio n a l because now you're discriminating against whites and you’ ve already said d is c rim in a tio n is uncon stitutional. They didn’ t understand that when you find a wrong has been done you also have a right to rectify and that affirm ative action programs are rectification. “ 1 am very much upset by the way this has developed, but so far we havn’ t had a single case that says segregation is constitutional. When the Cleveland case was won in the Supreme C ourt, M ottle rushed to Congress to try to get a C on stitutional Amendent to stop busing. This shows you that there are people who w ill use the C onstitution for everything that suits them, but the C onstitution becomes a malleable object when there is something they don’t w ant.” ' DES C O N N A L L Professional Corporation LEGAL CLINIC CONCENTRATING IN THE FIELDS OF: CRIMINAL LAW INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INTOXICANTS DOMESTIC RELATIONS WORKERS' COMPENSATION BANKRUPTCY PERSONAL INJURY WILLS - PROBATE AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS CONSUMER PROTECTION If you have a problem that is not covered in this list, please call and ask whether we can help Chances are, we can. If not, we can recommend someone else for you to call. One way or the other, we want to see you get the kind of professional legal counsel you're entitled to. The best time to call us, or any attorney, is before you are embroiled in a legal problem. This is called preventative law and it makes a lot of sense. Regardless, when you call us we will arrange for an initial consultation at your convenience. Cost: $20 We probably can't solve anything in this meeting, but it is a chance for you to explain your particular problem and for us to give you some idea of what it'll take to reach a solution. If you want us to proceed, we'll give you an estimate of the fees you should plan on. In writing. ft
