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 October 10, 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week prior to the arrests, two city ordinances requiring racial segregation of passengers in public transportation were repealed and a new one enacted.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 At the time the old ordinances were repealed and the new ones enacted, a suit brought by a group of Negroes seeking to enjoin the city commissioners from enforcing the segregation codes was pending in the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-