Civil Rights Lawyers Hold All-Day Closed Conference

Baldwin v. Alabama Brief for the Petitioner preview

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Date is approximate.

Collection
- Brief Collection
Taxonomy
Identifier
- a8523e61-be9a-ee11-be37-6045bddb811f

Cite this item

Press Releases, Loose Pages. Civil Rights Lawyers Hold All-Day Closed Conference, 1959. 4f6e3c81-bc92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/2fc848c3-8a95-41f8-b5a0-c6e90752fd93/civil-rights-lawyers-hold-all-day-closed-conference. Accessed August 19, 2025.

Copied!

    PRESS RELEASE @ e 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 
10 COLUMBUS CIRCLE » NEW YORK 19,N.Y. ¢ JUdson 6-8397 

DR. ALLAN KNIGHT CHALMERS Oe THURGOOD MARSHALL 
President Director-Counsel 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYERS 
HOLD ALL-DAY CLOSED CONFERENCE 

NEW YORK, Feb, 21. -- Lawyers active in school segregation cases 

from 8 southern states held an all-day strategy conference here today 

with civil rights attorney Thurgood Marshall, Director-Counsel of the 

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. 

The conference was held behind closed doors in a midtown hotel, 

Attending were lawyers who are or will be involved in cases dealing 

with desegregation of schools supported by public funds. 

It was disclosed that the major items on the agenda included: 

° A review of the status of present cases in which the NAACP 

Legal Defense and Educational Fund has given legal support and assist- 

ance. 

* The evaluation of legal tactics presently employed by Legal 

Defense Fund attorneys and those opposed to integration of public 

schools. 

« New legal strategy and techniques in the handling of future 

cases involving the constitutional rights of Negro citizens. 

* A state-by-state report on the progress of court-ordered and 

voluntary desegregation of public schools. 

Mr, Marshall revealed at the meeting that the NAACP Legal Defense 

Fund had been able to "give legal support and assistance in every 

instance where requests had come from Negroes being denied their con= 

stitutional rights." 

He also disclosed that cases against segregated schools are now 

pending in every southern state except Mississippi. 

"Despite economic boycotts, threats of physical violence and 

other threats against Negro litigants, their lawyers, supporters and 

sympathizers, successful civil rights legal actions are increasing in 

n several states," Mr, Marshall advised the lawyers. 



The recent orderly desegregation in Norfolk, Richmond, 

Arlington and Alexandria was cited by the civil rights attorney as 

examples of what can be accomplished when violence is not encouraged 

yor mob emotions whipped up by leaders in responsible positions. 

With token integration now in Virginia, only 6 hard-core states 

remain with complete segregation on the elementary and secondary 

school level. These states are Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, 

Mississippi and South Carolina. Negroes have been admitted on tho 

college level in Louisiana and Florida, 

Mr. Marshall warned the lawyers, however, that when integration 

replaces the Virginia massive resistance program, "we should expect 

even tougher resistance in the remaining 6 states." 

He pointed out that each of these 6 states has enacted or 

approved some form of legislation to evade desegregation. It is pos- 

sible that all of such legislation may have to be tested in the 

courts, Mr. Marshall cautioned. 

"But whatever and wherever legal action is necessary to obtain 

equal justice under law for our people, it will be taken," he pledged, 

"The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund will continue to 

render legal support and assistance to Negroes who are denied their 

constitutional rights, whether that aid is requested by the indi- 

vidual involved or through his lawyer." 

It was disclosed that today's meeting was the fourth such legal 

strategy conference held in New York since the Supreme Court entered 

its 1955 implementation decree in the School Segregation Cases outlaw- 

ing separation of the races in public education, 

= 90 -=

Copyright notice

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.

Baldwin v. Alabama Brief for the Petitioner

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in