Court of Appeals to Hear Durham School Case June 14

    PRESS RELEASE 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 
TOCOLUMBUS CIRCLE + NEW YORK19,N.Y. © JUdson 6-8397 

DR. ALLAN KNIGHT CHALMERS JACK GREENBERG CONSTANCE BAKER MOTLEY 
President Director-Counsel Associate Counsel 

S25 

COURT OF APPEALS TO HEAR 
DURHAM SCHOOL CASE JUNE 14 

June 5, 1°62 

NEW YORK -- The U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is 

scheduled to hear an appeal asking for increased desegregation in 

the Durham, N. C. school case on June 14 in Asheville, N. C. 

Plaintiffs in the case are 272 Negro school children, the lar- 

gest number of plaintiffs in any school segregation case. Jack 

Greenberg, Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, will 

represent the Negro plaintiffs. 

The Durham case is on appeal from an April 11 decision of 

District Judge Edwin M. Stanlev, who dismissed the complaint of the 

Negro children. Judge Stanley upheld the Durham School Board's 

policy of allowing transfers of Negro students to white schools only 

after rigorous screening by the Board, and the application of the 

North Carolina Pupil Placement Law to Durham schools. 

The Durham case is similar to the Roanoke, Va. school case 

which the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided last month. 

In the Roanoke case the Court invalidated "Negro" and "white" school 

areas, racially discriminatory transfer procedures, and the initial 

assignment of children to segregated schools. 

The Fund brief to the Court of Appeals attacks many of the same 

features in the Durham school system. Fund attorneys contend that 

the constitutional rights of Negro students are infringed "so long 

as a school system based upon dual racial zones is maintained and 

they are assigned to those zones." 

In 1959 and 1960, the School Board held appeal hearings to 

determine which Negro students would be eligible for transfer to 

white schools. The Fund brief states that the hearings and other 

criteria used to screen Negro students, such as residence, health, 

and grades, are applied in a racially discriminatory manner, and are 

"employed by Durham to frustrate, not effectuate desegregation." 



<2- 

The brief asks the Court to issue an order requiring the City 

of Durham to set up “a nonracial system of school assignments.” If 

the School Board is required to submit a desegregation plan, the Fund 

attorneys ask that the present plaintiffs be admitted to desegregated 

schools while such a plan is being prepared. 

Under the present screening system only fifteen Negro students 

have been transferred to biracial schools in Durham. More than 400 

Negro students applied for such transfers in 1959 and 1960. 

Fund attorneys are hopeful that a decision requiring stepped-up 

desegregation in Durham will be a serious blow to the "token" 

approach which has bogged down school desegregation in North 

Carolina. The Southern Educational Reporting Service revealed in 

May that only .061 percent of the 332,962 Negro school children in 

North Carolina are attending biracial schools. 

Attorneys for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in 

the Durham case are Conrad 0. Pearson, M. Hugh Thompson, William A. 

Marsh, Jr., J. H. Wheeler, and F. B, McKissick of Durham, and Jack 

Greenberg, James M. Nabrit, III and Derrick A. Bell of New York City. 

The School Board ig represented by Marshall T. Spears of Durham, 

N. C. 

Two similar school cases to be argued June 12 before the Court 

of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Asheville, N. C., are 

Charlottesville, Va. and Caswell County, N. C. 

S. W. Tucker of Richmond will represent the Charlottesville 

Negro plaintiffs, and Derrick A. Bell of New York City will repre- 

sent the Caswell County Negro plaintiffs. 

o=<0=<=