The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals was asked today to order the operator of the Birmingham City bus line…
Press Release
April 28, 1960
Cite this item
-
Press Releases, Loose Pages. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals was asked today to order the operator of the Birmingham City bus line…, 1960. bb2a569f-bc92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/74741fe3-8b1c-4975-bf0b-0a22830e6cfc/the-fifth-circuit-court-of-appeals-was-asked-today-to-order-the-operator-of-the-birmingham-city-bus-line. Accessed December 05, 2025.
Copied!
- PRESS RELEASE® ®
NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND
10 COLUMBUS CIRCLE + NEW YORK 19,N.Y. © JUdson 6-8397
DR. ALLAN KNIGHT CHALMERS o> THURGOOD MARSHALL
Director-Counsel President
April 28, 1960
BIRMINGHAM, ALA., Apr. 28 -- The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
was asked today to order the operator of the Birmingham City bus line
to put an end to its passenger segregation policy.
In a brief filed today with the court 13 Birmingham Negroes asked
the Court of Appeals to issue an injunction restraining the Birminchain
Transit Company from segregating its passengers by race.
The case originated out of an incident of October 20, 1958, when
9 of the 13 Negroes were arrested for refusing to move from the front
section of a bus to the rear, They were charged with and convicted of
breach of the peace.
A week prior to the arrests, two city ordinances requiring racial
segregation of passengers in public transportation were repealed and a
new one enacted. The new ordinance allowed operators of buses and taxic
to establish their own rules for seating passengers and made failure to
obey bus drivers a misdemeanor. The bus company then placed signs
seading "White passengers eat from front, colored passengers seat from
“ear,” on its buses.
At the time the old ordinances were repealed and the new ones
enacted, a suit brought by a group of Negroes seeking to enjoin the
city commissioners from enforcing the segregation codes was pending in
the district court. The suit was dismissed after the repeal of tho:ze
laws.
Follcwing the arrests and convictions, the Negroes filed a suit in
che federal district court seeking an injunction against the bus com-
any. The court held that the police officers who made the arrests
violated the Negroes’ constitutional rights and that the city could not
use the law te require segregation, but that the bus company was a "pri
vate" operator and was not subject to the restraints of the Fourteenth
Amendment.
It is this latter portion of the ruling of the district court
that the Negroes are now appealing. In the brief filed with the Fifth
Circuit Court of Appeals their attorneys argue that the district court
erred in denying the injunction against the bus company which continues
to require Negroes to ride in the back of its buses.
Attorneys representing the 13 Negroes are Thurgood Marshall, Ja
Greenberg and James M. Nabrit, III of the NAACP Legal Defense and
Educational Fund staff in New York City, and Arthur D. Shores of
Birmingham, Ala.
=n30e-