in an Illinois county, upon the ground that, as "judicial officers", they were protected by the same rule of immunity which is applicable to judges. Bradley v. Fisher, supra; Alzua v. Johnson, supra; Francis v. Crafts, supra, and Laughlin v. Rosenman, 82 U.S. App. D.C. 164, 163 F. 2d 838, were cited as authorities. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment entered by the district court in each of these three cases is affirmed. Senator ERVIN. Senator Dodd, I want to thank you very much, and express my appreciation for the fine work you have done on the Subcommittee on Internal Security, of which you and I are both members, and the fine protection you have given our country. Senator DODD. I can't think of anything that will do more to strengthen our internal security than to pass a good civil rights bill. Senator ERVIN. Thank you. Senator Eastland directed me to recess the meeting until 10:30 tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 1:30 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 10:30 a.m., Thursday, July 18, 1963.) CIVIL RIGHTS-THE PRESIDENT'S PROGRAM, 1963 THURSDAY, JULY 18, 1963 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:40 a.m., in room G-308, New Senate Office Building, Senator James O. Eastland (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Eastland, Kefauver, Johnston, Ervin, Dodd, Hart, Kennedy, Bayh, Hruska, and Keating. Also present: Joseph A. Davis, chief clerk; L. P. B. Lipscomb, and Robert Young, professional staff members. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT F. KENNEDY, ATTORNEY GENERAL Attorney General KENNEDY. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, we are today in the midst of a great debate, whether or not this Nation, the champion of freedom throughout the world, can now extend full freedom to 20 million of our own citizens who have yet to achieve it. In view of the urgency of the bill before you, I welcome the opportunity to appear before this committee to state the views of the administration and to answer any questions that may arise. It seems to me that no reasonable examination of this or any similar measure can proceed until we have answered one fundamental question: Is it needed, or not? Clearly, it is needed. No American can condone the injustices under which many American Negroes and other of our fellow citizens are forced to live-injustices that vary in kind and in cause from place to place; injustices which are sometimes so intense that in one of our States, with a nonwhite population of more than 1 million, of which 442,000 are of voting age, less than 25,000 of those Negroes are registered to vote. Consider also, the innumerable difficulties that face a Negro just traveling from State to State in our country something the rest of us take for granted. If he makes reservations in advance, they may not be honored. If he seeks accommodations along the way, he is likely to be rejected time after time, until, just to obtain lodging and food, he must detour widely from his route-and if he does find accommodations available to him, they are likely to be inferior. 21-579 0-64- -7 336 93 An ironic note here is provided by two of the available tourist guidebooks. One lists only one establishment with overnight accommodations where a Negro can find lodging in Montgomery, Ala. None are listed for Danville, Va. But a dog, provided he is traveling with a white man, is welcome to spend the night in at least five establishments in Montgomery and in four in Danville. Everywhere we look, we find irrefutable evidence that the Negroes in America have yet to be given full citizenship and we find increasing evidence, too, that they are no longer willing to tolerate the burdens we have imposed on them. Many millions of white people, especially in the North-people who until recently assumed that the Negro was satisfied with the great social progress of the past 20 years-are faced now with the startling discovery that it's not true; that whatever progress Negroes have made is inadequate to their need for equality. And none of us can deny that their need is real; that their frustration is genuine. We have been unreasonable about it, or ignorant of it, far too long. Even as we sit here today, National Guardsmen patrol the streets of Cambridge, Md., to prevent violence. Unrest is boiling in Savannah, Ga., in Danville, Va., and in countless other cities in the North as well as in the South. This is what happens when longstanding legitimate grievances are not remedied under law. Great moral damage is done to individuals, to communities, to States, and to the very fabric of the Nation. We cannot excuse violence from any source or from any group. The responsibility of the Negro leaders who set these demonstrations in motion is very great as is the responsibility of the white leadership in every community. But our responsibility as a Nation is most plain. We must remove the injustices. The alternatives before us are narrow. We can either act or fail to act. Obviously, we must act. In our judgment the bill before you charts the best course of action. All titles of the bill are important, but none is of more vital and immediate significance than the public accommodations bill. I scarcely need remind this committee that for an American man, woman, or child to be turned away from a public place for no reason other than the color of his skin is an intolerable insult-an insult that is in no way eased by the bland explanation that it has been allowed to go on for a hundred years or more. It is plainly a wrong, and must be corrected. Moreover, this is the wrong that has caused most of the recent demonstrations. If we can remove this cause, we will be giving the Negroes legal redress, taking the demonstrations off the streets and into the courts, averting the bitterness that will almost surely ensue if we fail. We may draw some encouragement from actions taken recently by cities in the Southern and border States to desegregate all or part of their public accommodations on a voluntary basis; but there are many hundreds of communities that have not begun to do so; where no action will be taken unless there is a law. It has been suggested that somehow a public accommodations statute might interfere improperly with private property rights. However, this is really not a valid argument. Thirty-two States already have laws banning discrimination in business establishments and most of those laws are far more encompassing and far more stringent than the legislation we have suggested. Moreover, Federal action in this field involves no novel constitutional concept. Congress often has regulated private business enterprises to remove burdens from the national commerce. The National Labor Relations Act, the Taft-Hartley Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the Agricultural Adjustment Act-these are only a few that come readily to mind, and there are countless others. Mr. Chairman, I have here a list of the Federal statutes based on the commerce clause which regulate private business and property, and I would like to submit that if I may. The CHAIRMAN. It will be admitted into the record at the conclusion of your remarks, or would you rather have it at this point? Attorney General KENNEDY. Right here, if I may. Could I read them into the record? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Attorney General KENNEDY (reading): Federal statutes: Anti-Rebate Act (railroads). Atomic Energy Act. Automobile Information Disclosure Act. The Boiler Inspection Acts (railroads). The Clayton Act. The Communications Act. Fair Labor Standards Act. The False Branding and Marking Act. Federal Coal Mine Safety Act. Federal Explosives Act. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act. Federal Firearms Act. Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. Federal Power Act. Federal Trade Commission Act. Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Fur Products Labeling Act. Gambling Devices Act of 1962. Hot-Oil Act. Interstate Commerce Act. Investment Company Act of 1940. Labor-Management Relations Act of 1947. Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 Livestock Contagious Disease Acts. Meat Inspections Act. Narcotics Manufacturing Act of 1960. Natural Gas Act. Plant Quarantine Act. Poultry Products Inspection Act. Securities Act of 1933. Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. The Sherman Act. Tobacco Inspection Act. Trust Indenture Act of 1939. U.S. Cotton Standards Act. U.S. Grain Standards Act. Work Hours Act of 1962. |