Memorandum to Senator Thomas C. Hennings, Jr., from Charles H. Slayman, Jr., on data to be furnished by Justice Department for inclusion in record of civil rights hearings__. The Civil Rights Section-Its Functions and Its Statutes, an address by Arthur B. Caldwell, Civil Rights Section, Department of Jus- Supplemental statement by Assistant Attorney General Warren Ol- ney III in response to questions by members of the Senate Subcom- mittee on Privileges and Elections__. Letter from Department of Justice commenting on testimony of Jack P. F. Gremillion before Subcommittee No. 5 of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives- Statutory specification of duties of Assistant Attorneys General_ Provision of Fair Labor Standards Act permitting United States to sue on behalf of a private citizen__- Specific civil rights protected by the Constitution and laws of the Comparison of proposed legislation giving the Federal Government power to invoke civil remedies in civil-rights cases with other areas where the Government has power to seek civil relief..... Labor Day and the Right To Work, portion of a speech by Lord Jus- tice Denning published in Los Angeles Times of September 4, 1955-- Official absentee ballot, general election, November 6, 1956, for the Letters regarding the appearances of witnesses from South Carolina__ Letter from Thomas F. Ellis of Raleigh, N. C., regarding investigation by FBI of complaints as to denial of right to vote... Summary report on rulings of New York State Commission Against Discrimination with respect to preemployment inquiries__. Letters and affidavits regarding testimony of Rev. Gus Courts___. Editorial. Clinton Contempt Issue, the Evening Star... Article, Federal Action and Local Issues, by David Lawrence_. Memorandum of statutes of South Carolina and Federal statutes__ Article, A Flagrant Abuse of Civil Rights, by David Lawrence_ Letter from Senator Thomas C. Hennings, Jr., regarding announce- ment that record would be kept open until March 8 to receive state- Public statement on legal procedings arising from integration conflict in Clinton, Tenn., by American Civil Liberties Union___ Affidavit from Board of Registrars for Burke County, Ga- Article, Gus Courts Testifies, by Harrison Henry Humes. Telegram from James L. Barlow, justice of peace, Hinds County, Miss_ Material regarding cause of death of James Edward Evanston of Letter from Senator Olin D. Johnston in regard to the appearance of the South Carolina delegation_-_ Letter from Hon. T. C. Callison, attorney general, South Carolina_--- Telegram from Daniel L. Beasley, Macon County, Ala., to Hon. Adam Statement from Daniel L. Beasley, Macon County, Ala., concerning CIVIL RIGHTS-1957 THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1957 UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, Washington, D. C'. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a. m., in room P-63, United States Capitol Building, Senator Thomas C. Hennings, Jr. (chairman of the subcommittee), presiding. Present: Senators Hennings, Ervin, and Hruska. Also present: Charles H. Ślayman, Jr., chief counsel, Constitutional Rights Subcommittee; and Robert B. Young, staff member, Committee on the Judiciary. Senator HENNINGS. The committee will come to order. We are very glad to have the distinguished Attorney General of the United States here this morning to open the hearings on the socalled civil-rights legislation. Mr. Attorney General, you may proceed in any manner you prefer. STATEMENT OF HON. HERBERT BROWNELL, JR., ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM P. ROGERS, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL; WARREN OLNEY III, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL; AND EDWARD L. BARRETT, JR., SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Mr. BROWNELL. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I have a prepared statement I would like to start with if that is agreeable with you, Mr. Chairman. On April 9, 1956, I transmitted to the Vice President and to the Speaker of the House a four-point program recommended by the administration to protect the civil rights of our people. I am appearing before you today in support of this same program. As you will remember, President Eisenhower, in his state of the Union message delivered to the Congress on January 19, 1957, reemphasized that we in this Nation have much reason to be gratified at the progress our people are making in mutual understanding. He reiterated that we are steadily moving closer to the goal of fair and equal treatment of all citizens without regard to race or color. The President observed, however, that "unhappily, much remains to be done." As a substantial step toward achieving this goal he urged passage of the administration program. This program includes: (1) Creation of a bipartisan commission to investigate asserted violations of law in the field of civil rights, especially involving the right to vote, and to make recommendations; 1 (2) Creation of a civil-rights division in the Department of Justice in charge of a presidentially appointed Assistant Attorney General; (3) Enactment by the Congress of new laws to aid in the enforcement of voting rights; (4) Amendment of the laws so as to permit the Federal Government to seek from the civil courts preventive relief in civil-rights cases. Proposed bills to carry out the administration program were submitted to the Congress last year. These bills in the form submitted by us are contained in one of the bills which is before the subcommittee today, S. 83, which was introduced into this Congress by Senator Dirksen and 36 other distinguished Members of the Senate and which is now before this subcommittee for consideration. S. 83 also contains some additional provisions relating to the proposed bipartisan commission on which I shall comment later. Numerous other proposals, including the bill in subcommittee print, which are before you have also been carefully studied by the Department of Justice, but I would like first to address myself to the administration program and thereafter comment on the other bills. The first one I would like to discuss in detail, Mr. Chairman, is the bill authorizing civil remedies as distinguished from criminal remedies. These are the matters which appear under part 3 and part 4 of S. 83 on pages 14 to 17 of that bill. I start out this discussion by saying what I am sure you will all agree to, that the right to vote is really the cornerstone of our representative form of government. I would say that it is the one right, perhaps more than any other, upon which all other constitutional rights depend for their effective protection, and accordingly it must be zealously safeguarded. The Federal Government has in the past and must in the future play a major role in protecting this essential right. It is true that under the Constitution the States are given the power, even with respect to elections for office under the Government of the United States, to fix the "qualifications" of the voters (art. I, sec. 2; amendment 17). But this power of the States is limited, with reference to the election of Federal officers, by the express power given Congress to regulate the "manner" of holding elections-article I, section 4-and, more importantly, by the provisions of the 14th and 15th amendments. The 15th amendment provides that in any election, including purely State and local elections, the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The 14th amendment prohibits any State from making or enforcing laws which abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States and from denying to any person the equal protection of the laws. The courts have held that these prohibitions operate against election laws which discriminate on account of race, color, religion, or national origin. And both of these amendments expressly confer upon Congress the power to enforce them by appropriate regulations. Beyond the provisions of the 14th and 15th amendments, which inhibit only official action, Congress has the broad power to protect voters in elections for Federal offices from action by private individuals which interferes with the right of the people to choose Federal officials. As the Supreme Court said in 1941 in United States v. Classic (313 U. S. 299, 315), this right to choose- is a right secured by the Constitution *** And since the constitutional command is without restriction or limitation, the right, unlike those guaranteed by the 14th and 15th amendments, is secured against the action of individuals as well as of States. Congress passed many years ago statutes, now title 42, United States Code, sections 1971 and 1983, under which private persons claiming that they had been deprived of the right to vote on account of race or color by persons acting under color of State law have been able to bring civil suits for damages and preventive relief. In fact, it is in a long series of cases brought by private individuals under these statutes that the courts have held that the constitutionally protected right to vote extends beyond the general election to any primary or special election which is either a recognized part of the State's election machinery or which is, in fact, the only election which counts in the ultimate selection of the elected officials. The Congress has also authorized Federal criminal prosecutions in the voting field. Actions by private individuals which interfere with the right to vote for Federal officials may be prosecuted under title 18, United States Code, sections 241 or 594. Persons who act under color of law to deprive individuals of their right to vote in any election, State or Federal, because of race, color, religion, or national origin may be prosecuted under title 18, United States Code, section 242. A number of prosecutions have been had under these provisions. So much for the present framework under the laws. The major defect in this statutory picture, however, has been the failure of Congress thus far to authorize specifically the Attorney General to invoke civil powers and remedies. Criminal prosecutions, of course, cannot be instituted until after the harm actually has been done yet no amount of criminal punishment can rectify the harm which the national interest suffers when citizens are illegally kept from the polls. Furthermore, I think it is fair to point out that criminal prosecutions are often unduly harsh in this peculiar field where the violators may be respected local officials. What is needed, and what the legislation sponsored by the administration would authorize, is to lodge power in the Department of Justice to proceed in civil suits in which the problem can often be solved in advance of the election and without the necessity of imposing upon any official the stigma of criminal prosecution. Let me now give you some examples of situations which have come before us in the Department in which we think the proposed legislation would have been of great assistance in protecting the right to vote. First, let me refer to the situation which developed last year in Ouachita Parish, La. In March 1956 certain members and officers of the Citizens Council of Ouachita Parish commenced an examination of the register of the voters of Ouachita Parish. Thereafter, they filed approximately 3,420 documents purporting to be affidavits but which were not sworn to before either the registrar or deputy registrar, as required by law. |