CIVIL LIBERTIES DOCKET
HIGHLIGHTS OF THIS ISSUE
The War on Sex
Can it be a crime to have a baby? To tell your daughter how not to have a baby? To refuse to peek into a house to find a man in a bed? See 56.15; 413.8; 413.9. for contradictory positions.The War on Poverty
Consciencious lawyers have always handled cases for poor people cheated by landlords and credit agencies, denied equal protection by government agencies and the police. Suddenly, with the expansion of the war on poverty, the legal profession has discovered the magnitude of the task of providing justice for the poor. This issue contains a number of "poverty" cases in various categories: rent strike — 59.46, 59.47, 59.47a; denial of counsel to felony defendants—353.27, 353.28, 353.29; and see, generally, cases on improper police practices, 304., denial of counsel, 371., 372., denial of bail or high bail, 401.
Since many poor people are Negroes, see cases at 500s.
Please send us material on the cases you are handling for people who need protection because they are poor.The War on War
This issue reports many cases of young men who conscientiously object to participating in the US Army, more than in any previous issue. See cases at 121., 122.
UN Universal Declaration of
In honor of the 20th anniversary of the United Nations, this issue prints, in appropriate categories, the text of sections of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "as a standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations."FSM and Selma
On Dec. 3, 1964, 780 students at the University of California—Berkeley, were arrested. The ingenious pretrial motions in the cases are described in California v Savio, 24.37, and bail problems at 401.23.
The litigation arising out of efforts to bring democracy to Selma, Alabama is described at 42.23, 51.45, 55.72, 55.101, 58.43, 59.35, 59.35a, 63.28, 63.28a, 580.10.How To Use the DOCKET
If your client wants to desegregate the city swimming pool or to sue a restaurant owner for refusing him service, you need to know what decisions the courts have handed down in similar cases before and after passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. You can find them quickly:
"But My Case Is Sui Generis!"
- Look in the Index to the DOCKET, in Vol. X, No. 1 (Nov. 1964), pp. X, i and X, ii (just before page one). You will find "Integration, racial, in"; "Dining places, 552." and "Government facilities, 555." and "Recreational facilities, 551."
- Turn to the sections, 552., 555. and 551. in each issue of the DOCKET, starting with the most recent issue. E.g., see pp. 127-129 herein.
- You will notice cases which have just been filed. Ignore them for the moment.
- You will notice other cases with citations to the official reporters (F2d and F Supp) and to RRLR (Race Relations Law Reporter), and a reference to a previous write-up in the DOCKET: "Facts: X DOCKET 80." Go back to the previous issues, find the number of that case, e.g., 553.Ga.2, and there you will find the holding. (Cites aren't available immediately; decisions are frequently reported in one issue and the citation given in the next.)
- Having found the reported decisions, you may want to see what issues plaintiffs are raising in the most recent complaints filed in cases similar to yours. For this reason, whenever possible, the DOCKET descriptions of new cases list Code sections and constitutional provisions cited by the parties in their pleadings.
For example, the prayers for relief in school integration cases are changing and becoming more inclusive. See e.g., 552.-Ga.13, Harrington, p. 122.
- If you find an interesting case and you'd like to see the complaint or other pleadings or memos, write to the lawyer listed at the end of the case description. (Only the lawyer for the party raising the constitutional question is listed.) Most lawyers are very cooperative. If no lawyer is listed, write to the court clerk or to us. We frequently have copies of materials.
But probably not.
If a client has a number of problems arising out of a single incident or series of incidents, it may be necessary to stop and think about his case broadly before you decide where to attack and whom to sue. In this situation, it is helpful to browse through the Table of Contents in the DOCKET, Vol. X, No. 1 (Nov. 1964), pp. A and B, and the Index, and look through the DOCKET sections which seem to be near your problems.
Frequently, and unexpectedly, it turns out that someone in some other part of the country has a very similar series of problems.
The typical civil liberties or civil rights litigation raises many issues and is fought out in several suits filed in several courts over a period of many years. That is why the DOCKET contains many cross references from section to section and case to case.1964 Civil Rights Act Cases
Civil and criminal cases arising out of the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act are reported here: 41.5 Pls and US v Maddox; 42.21 Kentucky v Taylor; 51.68 Florida v Geisen; 51.70 Georgia v Ricks; 58.40 Georgia v Mack; 58.41, .42 Florida v Washington and Wechsler; 58.43 Selma v Bennett; 58.45 Blow v North Carolina; school integration cases, 522. (see Table of Cases—Bd. of Educ., page); public accommodations cases—552.Fla. .8, .9, .10; 552.Miss.2; 552.Va.13; 553.Ga.3; 553.NC.1; 553.Utah.1; 553.Va.6; 580.10 US v Selma Officials; 590.6 US v Mills, Fillingame.
Read them and think.Important U.S. Supreme Court
- 51.25 Cox v Louisiana.
- 51.25a Louisiana v Cox.
- 52.76 Freedman v Maryland.
- 53.6 Garrison v Louisiana.
- 58.45 Blow v North Carolina.
- 59.27a Mississippi v Henry.
- 61.23 Collins and Pearson v Henry.
- 121.31, .32, .33 US v Seeger, Peter, Jakobson.
- 245.16d Dombrowski v Pfister.
- 245.17 Stanford v Texas.
- 303.56 Beck v Ohio.
- 353.30 Boles v Stevenson.
- 392.2 Singer v US.
- 501.La.11 Louisiana v US.
- 501.Miss.15 US v Mississippi.
- 501.Va.2 Virginia State Bd of Elections v Hamm
- 512.Ala.5 Swain v Alabama.
- 552.Ala.12 Katzenback v McClung.
- 552.Aak.2 Lupper v Arkansas.
- 552.SC.4d City of Rock Hill v Hamm.
- 553.Ga.2 Heart of Atlanta Motel v US.
- 561.13 McLaughlin v Florida.
Note: No Asterisks This Time
Cases reported in the last issue which are still pending, but in which there have been no new developments, are not listed in this issue with an asterisk, as is the usual practice. This is an economy measure.