Segregation and the Supreme Court

              Segregation and the Supreme Court
He are here this evening to discuss, I trust disspationately, a
most important public question;  namely, the imminent decision of the U. S.
Supreme Court with respect to non-segregated public schools.
This Problem
Tfclg tipc the court has been asked to come to grips with this
problem:    Is segregation of the races in school systems legal as long as
facilities are eonal?    Cftwljiim states and the District of Columbia assert
that it is.)    Or If s^rwation itself an inequality that violates the Constitution.    (The politically vocative colored people arc increasingly assenting
that it is.)
Th#re are now before the Court five separate cases.    Three are
basically similar; one involves no states rights aspects; and one differs from
all the rest in being brought by a state instead of m individual.    The cases
are as follows:
fligiMPl .irfK. Tonufcfl flffapl, <rf JMMHyjyMU    Negro pupils in Kansas sought
to overturn the state's permissive segregation statute.    They lost in a Federal
District Conxt and took the matter to the Supreme Court solely on the basis of
abridgment of constitutional rights.
■Rriflflit, Mt > <a««dfta ^hml PilUlCl*    Potentially the most explosive
of the five eases, this involves segregation in South Carolina.    The star performers among last week's cast of lawy@rs--Tfturgoed Marshall ol the national
Association for the Jrivancerwit of Colored People and John W. Davis for the South
Carolina respondent $~held briefs in this cast.
Itil MU tMkHLMmiLAggU Sfiltftffi BBiEff* Bill relates to the dual
school system of a rural county in South Central Virginia.    It and the preceding