STATSISN'T IF FON JEN JON MERS. F. A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRISSE FROM 195 SHAK OF MICHIGAN

that there had been a request of the Mr. Schlossberg be heard briefly io not know if the chairman was vas here or not. That request did not Saman. It came from the other side of y way of explanation, Congressman, by another member of the committee. Congressman.

ery much. In coming before this come appointment of Judge Carswell to the ce considered judgment of my eight other the House of Representatives. This presSeally endorsed by the following:

ex Chisholm of New York.

Dawson of Illinois.

avion Powell of New York.

Cay of Missouri.

Stones of Ohio.

cacers are in business and other activity and had asinal document, but they are united in the our tee to the Supreme Court.

en against this nominee and the one before him Cerstood by the President of the United States, d be shared these continued appearances on my to prevail upon you to establish the basic prinson of a racist or segregationist persuasion is per se siva on the U.S. Supreme Court. I grant you that this e Degress a new and strange point of view. There are even consider it un-American, especially when a racist sex axcèzde one from either of the other two branches Goverment but we must begin somewhere, must we

quently in American politics, this daring sugvas revolutionary as it first sounds; it is more a cocog what we preach. It is a matter of putting into Tory Asendes that everyone agrees upon. On August 8, Awing the Republican nomination to be Presi

hoe che msponsibility to enforce our laws and our judges have ***** chea de dedicated to the great principles of civil

I urge that the Senate insist that the President keep his pledge. This is why I urge you to reject the nomination of Judge Carswell to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

To black Americans and their leaders and to millions of whites who are dedicated participants in the struggle for freedom, this nomination is the second in a series of attempts to subvert the cause of equal justice. What is more, this strategy is becoming clearer to more citizens each day. No amount of obfuscation that may take place during these hearings is going to change that.

How can we come here today and seriously argue that Judge Carswell's unquestionably racist philosophy has changed, now that he has been nominated to the Supreme Court? It is hardly sufficient to suggest that this appointment will do him a world of good. In the meantime it will do the Nation a world of harm.

We should not have to take that risk. There are 320,000 attorneys, 439 Federal judges, and thousands of State court judges in the United States. Why does the President have to nominate one with a racist background?

You have before this body for consideration a nominee whose record as a judge leaves in my mind no doubt of his inability to sit on the highest court of the land and fairly decide issues that bear upon the question of equality between the races.

Second, we have a man who as a mature leader of his community committed himself to that perverse, sick theory, white supremacy. This theory of racism has created more dissension, ill will, and hatred than any other notion in the 194 years of our Nation's history, and some would still attempt to rationalize Mr. Carswell's attachment to this contemptible doctrine. How can we put a man on the highest bench who has said, and I quote only in brief part:

"I am a southerner by ancestry, birth, training, and inclination, belief and practice. I believe that segregation of the races is proper, and the only practical and correct way of life in our States. I have always so believed and I shall always so act. I shall be the last to submit to any attempt on the part of anyone to break down and to weaken this firmly established policy of our people. If my own brother were to advocate such a program, I would be compelled to take issue with him and to oppose him to the limits of my ability. I yield to no man, as a fellow candidate or as a fellow citizen, in the firm, vigorous belief in the principles of white supremacy, and I shall always be so governed."

Third, while a member of the Justice Department he participated as a director in changing a public golf course to a private facility for the express purpose of excluding blacks, in opposition to the court decision, and then denied his activity until it was exposed.

Through 1967, of the four civil rights cases that were decided by Judge Carswell and subsequently appealed to the circuit court, four were reversed, and I hope somebody asks me to cite them. And in addition, as Senator William Proxmire has pointed out: "Perhaps an even more disturbing phenomenon, however, because it goes beyond interpreting the law, has been Judge Carswell's habit of delaying civil rights litigation as long as possible. For example, in the Steele against Leon County Board of Education, a school desegregation case, plaintiff made a motion for further relief on May 7, 1964. On May 26, Judge

Carswell sustained defendant's objections to the raising of questions looking into teacher segregation. No further hearings were ordered before school opened. On January 20, 1965, the school was found to be in compliance with certain 1963 orders. In February of 1965, plaintiffs filed a further motion for hearings. After a series of legal maneuverings the court reaffirmed a denial of plaintiff's motion for further relief. Finally, on January 18, 1967, the circuit court remanded the case for further consideration in light of its decision in United States against Jefferson County Board of Education-tantamount to a reversal. Finally, after almost 3 years, the Carswell court granted the relief sought. This dilatory behavior in civil rights cases, where justice delayed is certainly justice denied-in this instance for 3 school yearscasts serious doubt upon Judge Carswell's judicial temperament.”

In a study done as a Yale Ph. D. dissertation in 1966 by Mary Hannah Curzan, Judge Carswell was found to be one of a group of 10 Southern judges whose civil rights decisions merited them the segregationist label. This label was applied, by the way, to only onethird of the Southern judges whose civil rights decisions were analyzed. In a recent interview Professor Leroy D. Clark of New York University, who formerly headed the operation of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund in Northern Florida, claimed Carswell had repeatedly delayed school cases by failing to rule until pressed to do so, and then often by issuing decisions that were palpably wrong and quickly reversed. "We would have a hearing and it would take several months for him to rule," Mr. Clark said. "I would have to file a motion to ask him 'would you please rule?' which is outrageous.'

Mr. Clark, is also quoted by Time Magazine as saying that "he was probably the most hostile judge I have ever appeared before; he would rarely let me finish a sentence."

Professor John Lowenthal of Rutgers University, a law professor, has, I presume, already testified before your committee as to the procedural tactics of Judge Carswell in 1964 in a case against civil rights workers trying to help enroll black voters in Florida. Professor Lowenthal said he found Judge Carswell's behavior consistent with his commitment to white supremacy.

Mr. William Kunstler, a prominent civil rights and civil liberties lawyer has also expressed to me his intentions to testify before this committee concerning his own shocking experiences as a trial lawyerin Judge Carswell's court.

To any serious member of the bar, an appointment to the Supreme Court is the highest recognition that can be achieved. In the instant case of the present nominee, there can be found little or no trace of judicial or scholarship.

Mr. Chairman, from his own admission he has never written any legal articles or other papers. Such considerations were apparently irrelevant in President Nixon's search for the right political man. James A. Wechsler has raised the question quite appropriately in my mind when he said:

"Was this the worthiest prospect available even granting the premise that the seat was being reserved for a Southern conservative? The conclusion is an insult to the very breed of man Carswell is supposed to represent, and which has on occasion produced judges widely esteemed for their learning in the law. Such an appointment invites

contempt for the Nation's highest court, disrespect for the law, and those who practice it is further heightened when the American Bar Association places its seal of approval on so shabby a political product."

As we said on September 24, 1969, in this same room before this same committee, the confirmation of such a nominee would serve notice that our Government intends to block off the few avenues that are now available for legal attack on the bastions of racism in our country. For it is the Supreme Court, my colleagues, which has given black people a certain measure of faith in the slow-moving and creaky legal machinery with which we are afflicted. To impair the courts' ability to deal with racism is to impose strains on the fabric of a society beyond its limits.

We urge you to reject the nomination of Judge Carswell. His appointment would hardly be consistent with the constitution's uncompromising hostility to segregation and inequality. It would unequivocally tell black people that the one significant route for peaceful resolution of our society's racial injustices now open to them is gradually being phased out.

In this Nation today we face more than a credibility gap. Amidst all the rhetoric the people of our country feel a profound lack of faith in the institutions of American Government and their ability to fulfill their charged responsibilities. Therefore, it is incumbent that the United States Senate insist on the appointment to the Supreme Court only of individuals of the highest standard, men who clearly will measure up to the awesome responsibilities and duties of membership on that court. This should be decided only on the basis of distinctive achievement and a demonstrated record of fidelity to the principles of equality inherent in the Constitution. We submit that in the nomination of Judge G. Harrold Carswell, this has not been so demonstrated. In our judgment, Judge Carswell is unqualified to sit on the Supreme Court, and we consequently urge that you reject his nomination.

That, Mr. Chairman, concludes my formal testimony and I will make myself available for any questions or discussions that might be desired.

Senator KENNEDY. I just want to extend a word of greeting to the Congressman and express my appreciation for your taking the time to be witness. As I understand the thrust of your statement, Congressman, am I right in observing that you don't feel that the blacks of this country who might have their cases adjudicated by the nominee sometime in the future, if Judge Carswell is approved by the Senate, would feel a sense of security or a sense of justice or fairness in having their cases decided by him?

Mr. CONYERS. Absolutely not, and it isn't based on suspicion. It is based on impartial evaluations that have been brought to my attention about the record that the judge already has. We are not predicting what he might do in the future, but all we as human beings can do is guide ourselves by his activities, his conduct, his statements, and his philosophical beliefs in the past, and I think that that is eminently correct. Not only do black Americans have little faith in this appointment, but millions of white Americans who have as much discretion know that if we don't have a fair court and a fair government we

are not going to be able to succeed in this democratic experiment and I think they too take the same kind of objection to this nomination.

Senator KENNEDY. You have always been one that has been pledged to nonviolence as well as to progress, equal rights and equal opportunities for all citizens.

In your efforts to deal with the tempers and frustrations of many of our black citizens, do you think your job will be easier or more difficult when you seek to get young blacks who are disillusioned and have a sense of hopelessness to try and work through the system, if this nominee is approved?

Mr. CONYERS. Senator Kennedy, not only is it getting more difficult, but with these and other kinds of activities and lack of activities coming from the Congress as a whole and the executive, in my judgment, it is becoming impossible to convince a lot of our young black citizens that they do really fit into this society.

They believe that they are not included. They believe from all the statistical evidence that is now clearly made available to them, and more importantly, from what they can see going around them, that there are two distinct separate societies in America, a black society catching hell, if you will pardon the expression, and a white society living in comparative affluence.

Now it does no good for nine black Congressmen to be trying to run around this country telling everybody that we are really trying to get together, that the Kerner commission report is being given any kind of fair understanding much less application, that the Walker riot commission report or the other commission reports on violence in this country, and all the other measures and records that indicate that black people are more unemployed, are more neglected by our Government, in greater numbers than whites. It is impossible for us to begin to tell them through this nomination that we are doing anything but losing the battle of persuading our colleagues in the Senate and in the House of Representatives that we can come together in this country, that we can resolve our differences, because you cannot put a man who had made these kinds of statements and others on the highest bench of the land with a prayer that maybe he will shape up.

I think that is an unfair imposition to ask of any American, be he

black or white.

Senator KENNEDY. Last Friday the President said he hoped black Americans would judge him by his deeds, not by his words. What is your reaction to that statement in the context of the Carswell nomination?

Mr. CONYERS. Well, of course we have been doing both, and I can't tell you which is more disappointing. I suppose the deeds are really more disappointing, because we all speak a certain amount of political rhetoric not to be fulfilled. I don't think black people are any more naive on that subject than any other part of our American citizenry. But what is going on is that we are definitely moving away from the coming together that the President had originally made such a great emphasis about, and I deplore it, and I think that this nomination, like the Haynsworth nomination before it, leaves us shuddering every time a vacancy opens up on the Supreme Court. If this is the direction we are going, heaven help us when he gets a chance to name a third vacancy on the Supreme Court.