Lay Plessy to Rest, Supreme Court Asked

    oiris RELEASE @ @ 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 
107 WEST 43 STREET * NEW YORK 36, N. Y. « JUdson 6-8397 

oa THURGOOD MARSHALL 
Director and Counsel 

ARTHUR B. SPINGARN 
President 

ROY WILKINS 
Secretary 

ALLAN KNIGHT CHALMERS, 
Treosurer 

ROBERT L. CARTER 
Assistant Counsel 

ARNOLD de MILLE 
Press Relations 

LAY PLESSY TO REST, 

SUPREME COURT ASKED 

WASH., D.C., Dec. 6.--The last stand of racial segregation under 

color of the "separate but equal" doctrine in public transportation was 

attacked here today by attorneys for the NAACP Legal Defense and 

Educational Fund in a brief filed with the U. S, Supreme Court involv- 

ing the segregation of Negroes on city bus and other local travel 

within state lines, 

"The 'separate but equal! doctrine has been riddled into death," 

Legal Defense lawyers say. “It is no longer enough to sustain a racial 

classification on a mere showing that equal facilities are made avail- 

able to the Negro group." 

The brief was filed by Thurgood Marshall, Legal Defense director- 

counsel; Robert L, Carter, Marshall's first assistant, Mr, William 

Taylor, all of New York, and Philip Wittenberg of Columbia, S. C., on 

behalf of Mrs. Sarah Flemming of Columbia. 

It asks the Supreme Court to affirm a decision of the U. S. Court 

of Appeals for the hth Circuit which held on July 15, 1955 that the 

Supreme Court decisions in the school cases should also apply to segre- 

gation on city buses. 

The ruling was rendered in a case brought by Mrs. Flemming against 

the South Carolina Electric and Gas Co. to recover damages after she 

had been struck in the abdomen and ejected from a bus by the driver 

for violating South Carolina's segregation law, 

The bus company has appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court on 

the ground that South Carolina state segregation statute does not 

offend any provision of the Federal Constitution, 

A lower court had dismissed the case on the theory that the Plessy 

v. Ferguson "separate but equal" doctrine was still the law as far as 

intrastate travel was concerned. 



sae ® ® 

The Court of Appeals struck down the South Carolina state segre=- 

gation statute and remanded the case to the lower court for further 

disposition. 

In their brief filed with the Supreme Court today, lawyers for 

Mrs. Flemming point out that there can be no doubt that the "separate 

but equal" doctrine is no longer "a reliable yardstick to determine 

whether a state has met its obligation under the llth Amendment" with 

regard to its Negro citizens. 

The Plessy v. Ferguson decision was rendered by the U. S. Supreme 

Court in 1696. Southern states have relied chiefly upon it since then 

to enforce and maintain racial segregation and discrimination in both 

public and priviate institutions. 

While the Supreme Court has not rejected the application of 

Plessy v. Ferguson in intrastate travel, the doctrine hes been steadily 

and expressly repudiated in other areas. "These decisions indicate 

that the Plessy decision is no longer controlling," NAACP Legal Defense 

attorneys told the high Court. “It is unquestionably at wer with the 

Court's present interpretation of the 1th Amendment." 

They cite several Supreme Court decisions since 1917 in which 

racial segregation has been found to violate the Constitution, 

The Plessy doctrine was dealt another serious blow in the NAACP 

ve St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., and Keyes v. Carolina Coach Co. 

cases, decided November 7, 1955, by the Interstate Commerce Commission. 

The Commission found that segregation in interstate railroad coaches, 

buses and station waiting rooms constitutes an undue prejudice and 

disadvantage in violation of the Interstate Commerce Act, even though 

"separate but equal" facilities were provided for Negro passengers, 

the lawyers for Mrs, Flerming note. 

No "valid" reason exists now which "warrants maintenance of 'sep- 

arate but equal'" in intrastate commerce when it has been abandoned in 

other areas, Legal Defense attorneys argue. "All of its rationale 

has been rejected by this Court." 

In asking the high tribunal to affirm the ruling of the lth Circuit 

Court of Appeals, the attorneys for Mrs. Flemming reminded the Court 

that the Plessy v. Ferguson doctrine has been rejected in every respect. 

All that remains is the "formality of overruling" it in intrastate com- 

merce, the field where the "separate but equal" concept was first 

applied by the Supreme Court. 



Sie 

"We respectfully urge the Court to take this opportunity to 

overrule Plessy and grant that troublesome doctrine a final repose," 

the lawyers conclude. 

NOTE TO EDITOR: 

Prior to the 1940's all travel in southern states, whether between 

states or within a state, was segregated in accordance with state laws, 

customs and policies of the carrier companies. The Supreme Court hed 

held that state laws requiring segregation in transportation did not 

contravene the equal protection clause of the 1th Amendment, and the 

Interstate Commerce Commission had held that federal law regulating 

carriers did not prohibit them i'rom segregating travelers in inter- 

state commerce, 

Harly in the 19)0's Congressman Mitchell of Chicago took to the 

Supreme Court a decision involving the refusal of a carrier to allow 

him to use available pullman space. The Court held this to be a vio- 

lation of the Interstate Commerce Act. 

In 1950 the Court struck down segregation in railroad dining cars 

in the Henderson v, United States case. The Court did not specific- 

ally rule that segregation itself was illegal, but it phrased its 

ruling in terms which made it impossible for a carrier to maintain 

separate dining and pullman facilities and still comply with the law. 

As a result, segregation is not practiced in pullmens or dining cars. 

The decision of the ICC on Nov. 7, 1955 encompasses these prior 

holdings, and goes much further, The ruling makes it unlawful for any 

carrier traveling between states (whether trains or buses) to segregate 

passengers because of race. 

The decision specifically makes segregation unlawful no matter 

how "equal" the facilities may be otherwise. It applies to coaches, 

waiting rooms and restrooms as well as to dining car and pullman facil- 

ities, 

The decision does not, however, require the desegregation of 

restaurant facilities in terminals operated by a lessee of a carrier. 

Such facilities were deemed not to ve "transportation facilities" and 

thus not within the jurisdiction of the Commission, 

The ruling is directed specifically against the carriers, It is 

the carriers, not the states, which will be held directly responsible 

for putting desegregation into effect, 



- @ 
slic bad 

If the carriers do not desegregate by January 10, 1956, the date 

set by the ICC, the Commission may apply to the courts for sanctions 

to enforce its ruling, 

The carriers may seek to upset the Commission's decision by 

appealing to the federal courts, but they have not as yet indicated 

whether they will attempt to do so. 

All state laws must bow to the federal law. in 1946 the Supreme 

Court, in Morgan v. Virginia, held that no state can require a carrier 

to segregate passengers traveling between states. The railroad sta- 

tions and bus terminals that service interstate railroads and buses 

are subject to regulations by the Interstate Commerce Commission, how- 

ever, Thus, in Atlenta, Ga., for example, the Union Station which 

services several rail companies must cease segregating, despite the 

Georgia policy of segregation. 

The ICC decision does not affect state laws which require the 

segregation of passengers traveling within a state, The Court of 

Appeals for the lth Circuit, in the Flemming case, however, held that 

these laws violate the lth Amendment, 

If the U. S, Supreme Court affirms the decision in the Flemming 

case, all state laws requiring or permitting segregated transportation 

will be null and void and the fight to end governmentally enforced 

segregation in travel will have been brought to a successful conclusion. 

=30=