United States v. Parker

236 F. Supp. 511, 1964 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9754
CourtDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama
DecidedDecember 17, 1964
DocketCiv. A. 1741-N
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 236 F. Supp. 511 (United States v. Parker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Parker, 236 F. Supp. 511, 1964 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9754 (M.D. Ala. 1964).

Opinion

JOHNSON, District Judge.

This action was originally instituted in August, 1961, by the Attorney General of the United States in the name of the United States pursuant to the provisions of Part IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (42 U.S.C.A. § 1971, 71 Stat. 637) as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1960 (74 Stat. 90). The State of Alabama was joined as a party defendant pursuant to Section 601(b) of the Civil Rights Act of 1960; the individual defendants were joined as members of the Board of Registrars of Montgomery County, Alabama.

Upon the original submission of this cause, this Court, sitting without a jury, on consideration of the evidence, consisting of the oral testimony of over 175 witnesses, together with approximately 13,000 exhibits, made and entered findings of fact and conclusions of law, and, as authorized by Rule 52, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, incorporated those findings and conclusions in a memorandum opinion; this opinion is published as United States v. Penton, 212 F.Supp. 193 (M.D.Ala.1962). At that time this Court found that the defendant State and its agents, including the registrars of Montgomery County, Alabama, had deliberately and consistently engaged in procedures and practices which favored white applicants to vote and, pursuant to these procedures and practices, had discriminated against Negro applicants to vote in Montgomery County, Alabama. This Court found that this discrimination was in violation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States in that it involved procedures and practices designed to deny (and which were effective in denying) citizens the right to vote without regard to race or color. United States v. Raines, 362 U.S. 17, 80 S.Ct. 519, 4 L.Ed.2d 524; United States v. Thomas, 362 U.S. 58, 80 S.Ct. 612, 4 L.Ed.2d 535; and United States v. State of Alabama, 192 F.Supp. 677 (M.D.Ala. 1961), 304 F.2d 583 (5th Cir. 1962), affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States, 371 U.S. 37, 83 S.Ct. 145, 9 L.Ed.2d 112 (1962).

In the original opinion as made and entered in this case, this Court further found that under the Civil Rights Act of 1957, as amended in 1960, where a finding of discrimination had been made and where such discrimination had resulted in a deprivation of voting rights pursuant to a pattern and practice, the Negro applicants who had thus been deprived of their right to vote might apply to the Federal court to be registered and, further, that in determining whether such applicants were qualified, the Court must apply the same standards used by the Board of Registrars in qualifying white applicants during the period within which the pattern of discrimination had been found to exist. This Court therefore found it necessary to determine exactly what those standards were as used by the Montgomery County Board of Registrars in registering white applicants. After determining those standards and applying the same standards to Negro applicants, this Court held that by the Board’s use of different and more stringent standards certain Negro applicants had been denied the right to register solely because of their color, and, *513 upon this finding, it was specifically ordered that specified Negro applicants be registered by the Board of Registrars of Montgomery County, Alabama. The original decree issued in this case was designed to accomplish three purposes:

“1. To partially correct and rectify the effects of the Board’s past discriminatory practices by placing on the registration rolls immediately the Negro citizens who were rejected solely on ac-account of their race;
“2. To forbid the continuation of such discriminatory practices;
“3. To establish the actual ‘qualification standards’ under which the Board of Registrars has accepted white applicants in the past and to set forth the rules and standards which the Board is to follow in determining whether applicants are qualified to register to vote in Montgomery County, Alabama. Such a decree will facilitate registration under the federal referee provisions of the Civil Rights Act if future conduct by the defendants makes this course necessary.”

Subsequent to this Court’s original opinion and injunction, the United States on June 13, 1963, filed a motion requesting the issuance of an order appointing voting referees for Montgomery County and ordering the defendant registrars to register certain named rejected Negro applicants. Upon the hearing of this motion, a decision was reserved, and this motion is still under submission. On July 2, 1964, the United States filed another motion, wherein this Court is requested to enjoin the defendants from:

“[R] ejecting any applicant on the ground that he failed to complete satisfactorily one or more of the tests provided for in Part III of the application presently being used in the registration of voters in Montgomery County, Alabama.”

The United States also seeks an order requiring the defendant registrars to place upon the permanent voter registration rolls of Montgomery County, Alabama, certain Negro applicants whose applications, according to the motion, show them to be qualified to vote under the law of Alabama and the decree of this Court; in addition, the United States has renewed its prior motions. Therefore, upon this submission, the total period involved in the application of the United States for an order requiring the defendants to place upon the permanent voter registration rolls of Montgomery County, Alabama, those Negro applicants for registration who are qualified but have been rejected is from December, 1962 to July, 1964.

On August 10, 1964, the defendants filed a motion asking this Court to dismiss and discharge the injunction issued on November 20, 1962, for the reasons (1) that more than one year has expired since the issuance of the injunction and that since that time the defendants have not engaged in any pattern or practice to deprive, on account of race or color, any citizen of the United States of the right to vote who is otherwise qualified to vote; (2) that an adequate time has been provided for those Negroes who desire to register and complete their registration during the period from November 20, 1962, through April 1, 1964; (3) that the registration requirements have been “frozen” for a reasonable or adequate period of time; (4) that there has been no pattern or practice of discrimination against Negro registrants since the issuance of the injunction on November 20, 1962, and this Court lacks jurisdiction to continue the injunction; (5) that the provisions of Title 42, § 1971, provide that said injunction issued by the Court on November 20, 1962, should not remain in effect for more than one year unless the Court subsequently finds that such pattern or practice is continued; and (6) that the Congress of the United States contemplates that no injunction should issue against *514 the Board for a period in excess of one year unless a pattern or practice of discrimination against Negroes continues.

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

Related

United States v. McGregor
824 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (M.D. Alabama, 2011)
Riley v. Kennedy
553 U.S. 406 (Supreme Court, 2008)
Reno v. Bossier Parish School Board
528 U.S. 320 (Supreme Court, 2000)
Southern Christian Leadership Conference v. Sessions
56 F.3d 1281 (Eleventh Circuit, 1995)
Harris v. Siegelman
695 F. Supp. 517 (M.D. Alabama, 1988)
Dillard v. Crenshaw County
640 F. Supp. 1347 (M.D. Alabama, 1986)
Harris v. Graddick
593 F. Supp. 128 (M.D. Alabama, 1984)
Buskey v. Oliver
565 F. Supp. 1473 (M.D. Alabama, 1983)
Carr v. Montgomery County Board of Education
377 F. Supp. 1123 (M.D. Alabama, 1974)
Hadnott v. Amos
295 F. Supp. 1003 (M.D. Alabama, 1968)
Miles v. Dickson
40 F.R.D. 386 (M.D. Alabama, 1966)
South Carolina v. Katzenbach
383 U.S. 301 (Supreme Court, 1966)
United States v. McClellan
248 F. Supp. 62 (S.D. Mississippi, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
236 F. Supp. 511, 1964 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-parker-almd-1964.