Statement by Jean Fairfax re: Desegregation

    American Friends Service Committee, Inc. 

and the 

NAACP Legal Defense & Educatiofjal Fund, Inc. 

i 
Statement by Jean Fairfax, Director, Division of Legal Information, 

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., } Yorks City 

Hotel Willard, Washington, D. C. t 
Tuesday, November 16, 1965, 11 A. M. & 

Southern street demonstrations this year dramatized the 

anxieties and frustrations of Negro citizens, who are concerned 

that a segregated and inferior education will permanently exclude 

their children from full participation in American li J 

A mere 2.6 per cent of the South's Negro childgen were 

attending integrated schools in 1964--10 years after the Supreme 

Court's decision on schools. Today, 10 years after that decision 

and a year after passage of the Civil Rights Act, a mere 6 per cent 

of the South's Negro children are in desegregated classrooms. 

If we proceed at the latter rate, it will take 28 years or 

until 1993 to accomplish the task. 

As lawyers, community workers and American citizens, we are 

_€oncerned about the potential danger in mounting despair, with 

te yératic processes, when Negroes see Federal laws, regulations 

and.Court orders flagrantly or subtly violated and observe Federal 

of fh dials too timid, unwilling or powerless to enforce them. 

*.. represent two aspects of private agency effort to promote 

integ ‘ated education, The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational 

Bund: Inc., has handled virtually all of the litigation aimed at 

ending school segregation, since it was established 26 years ago 

as an independent and separate organizetion. Be 

And, the American Friends Service Committee, for fifteen 

years has conducted community action programs to promote school 

desegregation starting right here in Viashington, D. C. e 

(more) 



“By Jean lg Director, Division of Legal Information, 
Defe 1d Educational Fund, Inc., New York City 

yton, D.. C. 

During the past summer, our two agencies placed 20 siaff 

members in the South, specifically assigned to promote school 

desegregation. 

This was in addition to the legal staff. The combined efforts 

of our two agencies reached thousands of Negro families in several 

hundred school districts in the Deep South which are desegregating 

under Title VI regulations as well as under orders of 

courts. 

Vie are pleased that we contributed to the registration of 

about 4,000 Negro children in previously all-white schools. We are 

convinced that without our efforts most of these students would 

Se 

Our experience would lead us to support the recent findings 

of the Southern Regional Council that fewer than 6% of the Deep 

South's Negro pupils are in desegregated situations. 

This is not just a statistic. This is a human tragedy. 

Hence, we feel that we have an obligation to record our 

experiences and constructive criticisms, However, with the 

privilege of critique, comes the responsibility of offering 

thoughtful, positive and constructive recommendations. 

First, our experiences and constructive criticism: 

* Machinery for the implementation of Title VI, as it affects 

the desegregation of public schools, was created late and has been 

inadequate to the task of restructuring one of our major institu- 

tions. 

*The delays in publishing the Regulation affecting he 

in announcing guidelines; in processing plans; and, in conf 

information from Department of Health, Education and Wel‘sre 

officials can perhaps be understood in view of the enormity of the 

task, and the lack of civil rights programming experience in the 

Office of Education. 

* However, the office did not seek the wisdom and assistance 

from private groups with experience in school dosegregation. 

(more) 



Statement oe Jean Fa or, Division of Legal Info 
ey Legal se a! 1 Fund, Inc., New York Ci 
Hotel Waliara, Jashington, D. C. 
Tuesday, November 16, 1965, 11 A. M. 

ager 

To those of us on the outside, it appeared that the operation 

inery, which should have been 

developed as soon as nt into effect, is non= 

existent. Even today, nplaints that were filed weeks ago, have 

not been investigated or resolved on a voluntary basis. 

o01 district has had Funds ed pursuant 

to the language of the C Act of 1964, Confusion and 

delay from the Government vantage however, when 

viewed from the position of a humble citizen seeking hig rights, 2G 

is another. 

* As we compared not rom our field 

that certain inadequacies and violations kept 

Poor Community Relations; Inadequate Notice;----Priori 

+ orm Citizens o 

Wie recommend a br 

about the requir o£ ndiscrim: Lon in all educationa 

programs and facilities whi Fed funds. This in- 

formational f yram s ir 1d s in deral 

buildings; radio and television announcements and pro rams featuring 

Federal officia 

recipient of Federal funds chould prominently display a standerd 

ication which would notice, prepared by the Office of E o + o o o ra
 

EI
 

Ke
] i <
 

ie : , 
what #the law is, how individuals ca 

it and how complaints may be filed; 

simple brochures, etc., and similar methods, depending on’ the local 

community. ( ) 
more 



x, Director, Division of Legal Inf ormation 
: onal Fund, Inc., New York Uity 

tea 1965, 11 A.M 

W #441) 

Sch receive Federal funds in 

by filing an Assurance of 1965-66 by three d 

Compliance, by transmitting a final court order requiring the 

desegregation of a school system, or by submitting a voluntary 

school desegregation plan. 

* Court Orders 

HE! has agreed to accept a final court order in satisfaction 

of a school district's gation to desegregate. The word "finalt 

has no significance in that all desegregation decrees are open- 

ended and 

There can be damaging consequences. 

ivolvement in the ] eparation of Voluntary 
soreqation Plans 

A school should be required to submit a statement that 

it sponsored, prior to the adgption and submission of its school 

desegregation plan, at least one public discussion of the plan in 

an open, well publicized board mee . The presence of a HEW pen, Pp g Pp 

representative at such a meeting might help to make it an honest 

effort to inve the community. 

he Adequacy of Various Kinds of Sct 
SAS 

HEV should again seek the views of concerned grouns-~including 

civil rights organizations--on the adequacy of desegregation plans. 

No one kind of plan can suit all situations. 

*Freedom of 

an interim 

measure the ade is unknown." However, we do know 

and that threats and acts of intimidation, economic repris 

violence occurred throughout the South--sometimes to terrorize 

Negroes before the registration period; sometimes to discourage 

the Negroes who had }»ecome identified when they registered their 

children; sometimes to force the withdrawal of Negro pupils after 

schools had been desegregated. 
(more) 



Statement by Jean Fairfax, Director, Division of Legal Information 
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., New York City 

: Hotel Willard, Washington, D. C 
Tuesday, November 16, 1965, ll A. NM, 

aie 

*Teacher and Staff Deseqreaation 

Teaching steffs, administrative and supporting personnel 

throughout the South remain totally segregated with perhaps a rare 

exception here and there. 

The total integration of school "systems" cannot come into 

being unless the teachers who shape the attitudes of the pupils are 

themselves integrated. 

We think that school desegregation can and should be 

accomplished in 1966-67, Twenty recommendations are listed between 

pages 32 and 56 of the Gardner memorandum. 

These recommendations relate to freedom of choice; 

transportation, nondiscrimination in school-affiliated services; 

programs and activities; preparation of pupils and teachers; 

transfer and assignment periods; use of total school faeilities in 

desegregation process; cite selection and new construction; rate of 

desegregation; appeal process following rejection from enrollment; 

role of state agencies; and, compliance machinery. 

There is a specific concern for the lack of a vigorous, 

coordinated approach to the problem of the intimidation of and 

reprisals against Negroes who seek a nonsegregated education -ie- the 

major weakness in HEl's implementation of Title VI. 

The greatest single obstacle to desegregation is fear: that 

children will be harmed and that their parents will lose their jobs, 

property, or even their lives. 

The Federal Government has an obligation to protect persons 

who seek to enjoy their constitutional rights. Yet, although HEW's 

Regulation specifically prohibits such acts by recipients(i.e. 

school officials) and other persons against Negroes who seek their 

rights under Title VI, HE! officials communicate a sense of help- 

lessness when informed of these acts. 

(more) 



pegeomene BT Jea Fairf Xs ne Division of Legal Information 
x | Fund, Inc.,-New York City 

CONCLUSION : 

Experience has shown that delays at one stage may make 

successful integration even more difficult to achieve later. 

School systems and communities are not static; what may bp an 

acceptable plan one year may be completely inadequate a yea ar later. 

Federal responsibility should be, therefore, to achieve 

immediate maximum integration, periodically to review developments 

and to require those changes which will meet new situations. 

-30- 

EDITOR'S NOTE: For further information contact Jesse DeVore, 

ACP Legal Fund,.Tuesday, Woveniber 16th at 

the Hotel Willard, Washington, D. C, NA 8-4420 

NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., New York City 
Jesse DeVore, Director, Public Information Area Code 212 Jt 6-8397,