U. of Alabama Loses Attempt to Bar Negroes

Press Release
October 13, 1955

U. of Alabama Loses Attempt to Bar Negroes preview

Cite this item

  • Press Releases, Loose Pages. U. of Alabama Loses Attempt to Bar Negroes, 1955. 436c3c33-bc92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/96c2580f-83a5-441c-8768-5add821cdfb7/u-of-alabama-loses-attempt-to-bar-negroes. Accessed June 01, 2025.

    Copied!

    » 

PRESS RELEASE @ e 

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

THURGOOD MARSHALL 
—a Director ond Coon ‘resident 

ROBERT L. CARTER 
Meare Aulus Assistant Counsel ecretary 

ALLAN KNIGHT CHALMERS, ARNOLD DE MILLE 
if Press Relations reasurer 

U. OF ALABAMA LOSES ATTEMPT TO BAR NEGROES 

October 13, 1955 

WASH., D.C,--The University of Alabama lost its three year fight 

to keep two Negro students out of the state-supported institution 

when the U. S. Supreme Court last week reinstated an injunction 

issued by a federal district court ordering the University to admit 

the Negro students. 

The high tribunal reinstated an injunction issued on July 1, 

1955 by Federal Judge Hobart Grooms which restrained the Dean of 

Admissions, William F, Adams, from denying the two students admission 

"solely on account of race and color," The decision was the first 

rendered in a school segregation case by the high Court this term 

which convened October 3. This case was also the first to be decided 

by a federal district court following the U. S. Supreme Court's May 31 

implementation decree, 

The suit was brought against the University by two young Negro 

women, Autherine J, Lucy and Polly Ann Myers who sought courses in 

library science and journalism. Both had originally been accepted by 

the University, received letters of welcome from the president and 

assigned to dormitory rooms. When they appeared in person, however, 

they were informed by the Dean of Admissions that an error had been 

made and that the Alabama state law would not permit them to enroll. 

The young women were encouraged by the dean to seek admission to 

either the Alabama State College for Negroes at Montgomery, or at 

Tuskegee Institute, All such offers and suggestions were refused, 

An appeal to the president of the University and later to the Board of 

Trustees brought a statement from the University that no action on 

their applications wuld be taken until the Supreme Court ruled on 

the then pending 5 school segregation cases. 

The Negro students then took their case to the U. S. District 

Court in Birmingham in September 1952, Their attorneys asked the 

court to issue an order "permanently enjoining the University" from 



SO 

denying the plaintiffs, and others similarly situated, the right to 

enroll in the U. of Alabama which was granted on July 1, 1955. 

Attorneys for the University had argued that the students were denied 

admission because they did not meet the requirements of the college. 

Following Judge Groom's injunction order, a motion was filed by 

the University and granted by Judge Grooms to "suspend the injunc- 

tion" pending its appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for 

the Fifth Circuit. Attorneys for the students then filed a motion 

asking the Fifth Circuit to "vacate" the suspension order and rein- 

state the injunction. This motion was denied by the Fifth Circuit. 

An application was then made to the U. S. Supreme Court in September 

195). 

The October 10 order of the Supreme Court, however, affects only 

the two students involved. 

NAACP Legal Defense attorneys for the two Negro students were 

Arthur D, Shores of Birmingham and Constmce Baker Motley of New York 

City. 

=30<

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top