Legal Defense Fund Suit Seeks to Unseat 21 Souther Congressmen

    i | » 10 Columbus Cirele 
S New York, N.Y. 10019 

JUdson 6-8397 

NAACP 

Legal Defense and Educational Fund 
PRESS RELEASE 

President 
Dr. Allan Knight Chalmers 

Director-Counsel FOR RELEASE 
Jack Greenberg Wednesday, 

Associate Counsel November 18, 1964 
Constance Baker Motley 

LEGAL DEFENSE FUND SUIT SEEKS TO 
UNSEAT 21 SOUTHERN CONGRESSMEN 

WASHINGTON=--An estimated 21 southern Congressmen will lose their 
jobs if Section 2 of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is 
enforced, NAACP Legal Defense Fund attorneys told the U.S. District 

Court here today. 

Secretary of Commerce, Luther Hodges and Director of the Bureau 
of Census, Richard M, Scammon are defendants in this case which seeks 

to protect voting rights. 

Legal Defense Fund attorneys today asked the District Court to 
deny the defendants’ motion to dismiss. 

Dr. Abram J, Jaffe, director of the Manpower and Population 
Program at Columbia University's Bureau of Applied Social Research, 
told the Court that it is possible to enforce Section 2. 

Since the Bureau of Census has never tried to enforce Section 2 
under modern conditions, Dr. Jaffe stated in an affidavit, it would 
be “premature and unrealistic" to conclude that the Bureau could 
not accurately measure denial and abridgment of the right to vote. 

Section 2 of the 14th Amendment provides that: 

"When the right to vote...is denied to any of the male in- 
habitants of such state, being 21 years of age...the basis for 
representation (in Congress) therein shall be reduced in proportion 
which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole 
number of male citizens 21 years of age in such state." 

Current interpretation includes women citizens. 

The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 and an 1872 act of 
Congress calls for its implementation. The Bureau of Census 
attempted to comply by collecting statistics of denial and 
abridgment of the right to vote during the Census of 1870. 

But, the Constitutional clause has been ignored ever since. 

The Legal Defense Fund ultimately "seeks a declaration of the 
defendants' duty to comply with Section 2 when they compile, compute, 
prepare and transmit the decenial apportionment of Representatives 

in Congress." 

The next census will be in 1970. 

Today's action, if successful, might subtract four representa- 
tives from Virginia; two from South Carolina; two from Georgia; one 
from Florida; three from Alabama; two from Mississippi; one from 
Louisiana; and six from Texas, according to Dr. Jaffe. 

On the other hand, states of the North and West might gain 

Congressional representatives. 

California might gain three; Massachusetts two; Illinois, three; 
Michigan, two; Pennsylvania, Ohio, Connecticut, Maine, Missouri, 
Minnesota, and Nebraska and other states would gain one each, Dr. 
Jaffe said. 

(more) 

Jesse DeVore, Jr., Director of Publie Information—Night Number 212 Riverside 9-8487 ae 



Legal Defense Fund Suit Seeks To -2- 
Unseat 21 Southern Congressmen November 18, 1964 

The Plaintiffs 

The twenty-two plaintiffs are both Negro and white. They 
are from six northern states: Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, 
Missouri, Illinois, Ohio and California; and three southern states: 
Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, 

Each of the 15 Northern plaintiffs is a registered voter in his 
or her state. Each seeks relief from "debasement and dilution of 
his or her vote arising from defendants' failure to enforce" 
Section 2 of the 14th Amendment. 

They add that failure of the defendants to “administer the 
apportionment process in a constitutional manner results in their 
Congressmen representing more persons than do Congressmen from 
states which deny or abridge the right to vote as specified" in 
Section 2. 

Each of the ten southern plaintiffs is a Negro who has had his 
or her "right to vote denied or abridged by their state in a manner 
giving rise to a reduction in the population basis for apportionment 
of the state as provided by Section 2. 

"Each alleges that his or her state would lose at least one 
representative in Congress on the basis of an apportionment executed 
by defendants in accordance with Section 2" 

r 

Dismissal Sought 

* ‘denial of right to vote is not sufficient injury to 
require court action 

* such a legal action would involve the Court in a 
political matter 

* the Bureau, as presently organized, cannot secure in- 
formation needed, 

Legal Defense Fund attorneys take sharp issue in their 
memorandum, to the defendants' motion to dismiss, 

Among the citations was the Supreme Court case of Wesberry v. 
Sanders (decided Feb, 17, 1964) in which the High Court held 
unconstitutional, a Georgia congressional apportionment under which 
on congressional district had three times the population of another. 

f 
The attorneys utilized this case to counter item two (see 

above) of the defendants' motion to dismiss. 

Government's Side 

Mr, Scammon stated in his affidavit, that it would be 
impossible, "within the present operations if the Bureau of Census, 
for the Bureau to ascertain accurately the number of Citizens over 
21 in each state whose right to vote...has been denied or abridged. 

Dr. Jaffe filed his affidavit in reply. 

He argues that if the Census Bureau were to devote to measure- 
ment of denial and abridgment of the right to vote "even a fraction 
of the amount of energy which it devoted to perfecting statistics on 
unemployment" Section 2 could be enforced, 

(more) 



Legal Defense Fund Suit Seeks To -3- 
Unseat 21 Southern Congressmen November 18, 1964 

The distinguished and widely published social scientist com- 
puted a sample apportionment taking Section 2 into account. (Some 
of his conclusions are found on the attached extract.) 

Started With Letter 

The case stems from a letter from veteran Civil Rights worker, 
Daisy E, Lampkin of Pittsburg to Secretary Hodges on February 28, 
1963. 

Mrs. Lampkin complained of the Commerce Department's failure to 
take action to carry out Section 2 in face of wide-spread denial 
of right to vote in many southern states, 

Mr. Scrammon answered the letter on March 8th saying very 
little could be done since Congress would have to give legislative 
authority. 

The case is being handled for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund by 
Jack Greenberg, director-counsel, Constance Baker Motley, James M, 
Nabrit, III, and Michael Meltsner, all of the Legal Defense Fund's 
New York City headquarters, 

They are joined by Attorney William B,. Bryant of Washington. 

Attorneys of counsel include Richard L. Banks, Boston; 
Theodore M. Berry, Cincinnati; Loren Miller, Los Angeles; S.W. Tucker 
Richmond; A,P. Tureaud, New Orleans; A.W. Willis, Jr. Memphis; and, 
Margaret Bush Wilson, St. Louis. 

280