United States v. A. L. Ramsey, Circuit Court Clerk and Registrar, Clarke County, Mississippi, and State of Mississippi

331 F.2d 824
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided April 23, 1964·No. 20596_1·Published·Cited by 27 cases

Opinions

HUNTER, District Judge:

In July of 1961 the Attorney General of the United States filed a complaint in the District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi against A. L. Ramsey, Circuit Court Clerk and Registrar, Clarke County, Mississippi, and the State of Mississippi, under the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and 1960 (42 U.S.C.A. § 1971 et seq.). The complaint alleges that defendants, in conducting registration for voting, have engaged in certain racially discriminatory acts and practices which deprived Negro citizens of Clarke County of the right to register to vote; that these deprivations were pursuant to a pattern and practice, and that unless restrained, defendants will continue to engage in such acts and practices. The prayer is for:

A. A finding of a pattern and practice and the issuance of an injunction ordering defendants to refrain from:

(1) Engaging in any act which would deprive any citizen in Clarke County of the right to vote on account of hi’s race or color;

(2) Engaging in any act which would delay, prevent, hinder or discourage qualified Negro citizens, on account of their race or color, from applying for, and becoming, registered voters;

(3) Failing to register any Negro applicant who possesses the same or similar qualifications of the least qualified white person who has been registered.

After a long, hard, and well fought trial, the District Court made specific findings of fact and conclusions of law and entered its decree, which:

1. Dismissed the complaint against Mississippi;

2. Found that Negro citizens had been discriminated against by the Registrar, but that this discrimination did not form a pattern or practice of discrimination within the meaning and contemplation of 42 U.S.C.A. 1971(e);

[826]*8263. Granted to the United States injunctive relief against the County Registrar, A. L. Ramsey, enjoining and restraining him from engaging in any act or practices which would deprive any citizen in Clarke County of the right to vote on account of his race or color. The injunction was detailed.1

It is fair and accurate to say that in substance what the District Court ordered was full and non-diseriminatory compliance with the law of Mississippi. No finding of any unconstitutionality of any Mississippi constitutional or statutory provision is sought by the United States.2 However, the United States appealed, assigning three specific errors:

(1) The District Court erred in dismissing the amended complaint as to the State of Mississippi.

(2) The District Court erred in refusing to find that the discrimination found to have been committed constituted a pattern or practice of discrimination.

(3) The District Court erred in not granting the complete relief sought by appellant as outlined in appellant’s proposed decree.

The initial error assigned is the District Court’s dismissal of the State of Mississippi as a party. Under our holding in United States v. Atkins, 5 Cir., 323 F.2d 733, 739, we do not think that it was improper to eliminate the State as a party. There, we referred to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1971(c), as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1960, § 601(b), and to the case of United States v. Alabama, 1960, 362 U.S. 602, 80 S.Ct. 924, 4 L.E.2d 982, and stated:

“In that case, the Supreme Court intimated no views upon 'any defenses, constitutional or otherwise, that may be asserted by the State.’ We follow the same course in the present case.”

Inasmuch as full and complete relief can be afforded here without enjoining the State, we hold that the court below was correct in its dismissal of the State as a party.

Some discussion was had between the parties in the argument of this case concerning the application of the freezing principle. As shown in the Atkins decision, this Court has had the principle under discussion, but has not been faced with a case which required a decision on the subject. Under the facts here, we think that adequate and proper relief is provided by the judgment of the court below, as hereinafter modified, and we pretermit further discussion of the principle.

And the same is true of the appellant’s contention with respect to pattern and practice.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. A. L. Ramsey, Circuit Court Clerk and Registrar, Clarke County, Mississippi, and State of Mississippi, 331 F.2d 824 (5th Cir. 1964).

331 F.2d 824 (United States v. A. L. Ramsey, Circuit Court Clerk and Registrar, Clarke County, Mississippi, and State of Mississippi) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Green Party v. Kemp
171 F. Supp. 3d 1340 (N.D. Georgia, 2016)
State v. Guibilio
353 A.2d 165 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)
United States v. T.I.M.E.-D.C., Inc.
517 F.2d 299 (Fifth Circuit, 1975)
United States v. Bob Lawrence Realty, Inc.
474 F.2d 115 (Fifth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Real Estate Development Corporation
347 F. Supp. 776 (N.D. Mississippi, 1972)
United States v. Ironworkers Local 86
443 F.2d 544 (Ninth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Ramsey
353 F.2d 650 (Fifth Circuit, 1965)
United States v. McClellan
248 F. Supp. 62 (S.D. Mississippi, 1965)
United States v. William B. Mandell Co.
242 F. Supp. 873 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1965)
United States v. Cox
342 F.2d 167 (Fifth Circuit, 1965)
United States v. Mayton
335 F.2d 153 (Fifth Circuit, 1964)
United States v. State of Mississippi
229 F. Supp. 925 (S.D. Mississippi, 1964)