Greenberg Statements on Nixon's School Desegregation Statement
Press Release
March 24, 1970 - March 25, 1970

Cite this item
-
Press Releases, Volume 6. Greenberg Statements on Nixon's School Desegregation Statement, 1970. 86c47b10-ba92-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/a3954151-5e35-4a5e-91d0-ecddab902ffb/greenberg-statements-on-nixons-school-desegregation-statement. Accessed July 11, 2025.
Copied!
107 = } ] i i > = 5 Ss : NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC Jegall =i efense | jumd 10 Columbus'Circle, New York, N.Y. 10019 * JUdson 6-8397 STATEMENT BY ON TUESDAY, 2:00 P.M. Please bear in mind that the LDF is a completely separate organization even though we. were es stablished by the NAACP and those initials are retained in ou name. Our correct designation is NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., frequently shortened to LDF. NO te) On the day that troops arrived in New York to act in the postal strike, President Nixon's statement that "there are Limits to the amount of government coercion that can reasonably be used" is shocking. The use of the term "coercion" when the issue is the protection of the constitutional rights of aes children is just another example of ructoric which Paraiy "reduces prevailing confusion" on the question of school desegregation. No one is asking for troops to take over Bchoul boards. We need only uagercre act:ion by the Department of | Justice and HEW. We sedrch in vain for any- such promise in -an-daductible far Il_S_iacome tax purposes _ N this statement. No responsible| civil rights organizations and no court has attempted to establish racial grids to which the President refers, ahd no one advocates busing for its | own sake or arbitrary racial balance. 1 i The statement mee schools will not be expected to achieve | "the kind of multiracial society which the adult community has failed to achieve for itself" is a repudiation of one , H f acknowledged purposes of education. The very purpose of { : schools is to raise a generation according to our national | } ideals. Since the proposed half piftion dollars cannot be used in desegregation plans where busing. is employed, .ahd since i \ as ; busing is part of /Almost all the educational systems in Ss * ! . a } a | the country, integrated or segregated, the main weight of i : : agi fei ony a | i. the funds will be towards maintaining the segregated status quo. | To pay lip ser integrated society of segregation woul inferior education segregation. NOTE: Please bear 3 vice to integrated schools and an While acquiescing in the continuation doom black children to the kind of that historically has resulted from S30 | | lin mind that the LDF is a completely separate organization even though we were established by the NAACP and those initials are retained in our name. Our corre¢t designation is NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., frequently shortened to LDF. | ~ - 10F ctstoncer+by Jack Greenberg, Director-Counsel, N.A.A.C.P. LegatDefense and Educational Fund Wednesday, March 25, 1970 ‘ The struggle over school integration is really a struggle over what this country is all about: whether we submit to the meaner and vicious impulses among us, or whether we apply all of our energies and talents to achieving one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all, a phrase which our children reiterate daily but experience far too infrequently. The incongruity of President Nixon's statement, that “there are limits to the amount of government coercion that can reasonably be used" to achieve integration cannot be overlooked - coming as it did on the day that troops arrived in New York to act in the postal strike. The use of the term "coercion" when the issue is the protection of the constitutional rights of black children is just another example of rhetoric which rarely "reduces prevailing confusion." But no one is asking for troops to take over school boards. We need only vigorous action by the Department of Justice and HEW. We search in vain for any such promise. Those of us who have struggled to achieve equality through law are dismayed at the President's statements about the role of the courts, his emphasis on the disagreements among lower courts and his comment that certain decisions are untypical. We know that Brown v Board of Zducation, -the School Segregation decision- was not an American aberration although some perscns thought it was "untypical" 15 years ago. If we had followed Mr. Nixon's theory that as he pucs it, "We should nct provoke any court to push a constitutional principle beyond its ultimate limit," we would never have had a Brown decision. == The creative role of law in a constitutional democracy is to push for fresh interpretations, to resolve conflicting interpretations and thus to affirm the flexibility of our system. The poor black child in a segregated school is now required to pull himself up by his own bootstraps. He will have, in the President's words "the right and the ability to choose for himself and the mobility to move upward." Nothing in this statement, however, gives any promise that this will be accomplished. Reliance on the good faith of school boards to follow the law collides with experience since 1954 which teaches that too many school boards are not going to achieve equal educational opportunity unless effective enforcement action is taken against them. The neighborhood school -the segregated neighborhood school- has now received highest endorsement. But here too the message is unclear. Federal officials will not be permitted to advocate busing. But no responsible civil rights organization and no» court has been advocating busing for its own sake or for arbitrary racial balance. No one has attempted to establish the "racial grids" to which the President refers into which persons would be required to fit their lives by "some mathematical formula or automatic assign- ment." The concern has been to find creative remedies and busing has been only one of many. So, we are left with the neighborhood school - but not quite. Even President Nixon has recognized the value of having children spend part of their school day in an integrated setting on “neutral territory," to use his term. How he intends to do this without busing he does not say. The President proposes spending half a billion dollars next year and a billion dollars two years from now. Will this transfer of funds short change other programs? The purpose of these expendi- tures is not entirely clear, but the amount is a pittance compared to educational needs arising out of segregation in this country. And the effect would seem to be to entrench segregation. The President's statement that schools will not be expected to achieve "the kind of multiracial society which the adult community has failed to achieve for itself" is a repudiation of one of the acknowledged purposes of American education. Has he forgotten that the Americanization of children of the foreign born was one of the great achievements of the public schools and contributed to the development of national unity? The very purpose of schools is to raise a generation according to our national ideals.