Page images


[ocr errors]


Appendix IX—Continued

Community Service Society --

Delaware Valley Fair Housing Council..

Evangelical United Brethren Church, Baltimore Ministers Associa-


Kinston Board of Realtors, Kinston, N.C..
Newport News-Hampton Board of Realtors, Hampton, Va.
New York County Lawyers Association.
Norfolk & Portsmouth Bar Association..
Panama City Board of Realtors, Panama City, Fla.
Parma Bar Association, Parma, Ohio..
Tri-City Board of Relators, Kennewick, Wash..
Tucson Board of Relators, Inc., Tucson, Ariz. -
Wilson Board of Relators, Wilson, N.C.---

Winston-Salem Board of Relators, Winston-Salem, N.C.
Appendix X-Statements of individuals:

Eaton, R. W., Tyler, Tex..
Houts, Hale, attorney, Kansas City, Mo.
Lott, Hardy, attorney, Greenwood, Miss.

Smith, Reverend Addison L., methodist pastor, Clayton, Del...
Appendix XI-Additional views of witnesses:

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

Prof. Sylvester Petro, New York University, School of Law..
Appendix XII-Removal cases:

Georgia v. Rachel et al., 384 U.S. 780 (1966) -

Greenwood v. Peacock et al., 384 U.S. 808 (1966) -
Appendix XIII—Statement made by the Honorable Hubert H. Humphrey,

Congressional Record, June 4, 1964, page 12291.--
Appendix XIV–Additional statement of Attorney General Nicholas deB.

Appendix XV— Article by Alfred Avins.
Appendix XVI–Additional statements from U.S. district judges.







June 6.

June 7

June 8.

June 9.

June 10.

June 13.

June 14,

June 15.

June 16

June 21

June 22

June 24.

June 28.

July 13.

July 14.

July 15.

July 19

July 20

July 26

July 27

July 28.

August 4..


















MONDAY, JUNE 6, 1966

in room


Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m., 2228, New Senate Office Building, Senator Samuel J. Ervin, Jr., presiding.

Present: Senators Ervin, Kennedy of Massachusetts, Bayh, Dirksen, Hruska, Scott, and Javits.

Also present: George Autry, chief counsel; H. Houston Groome, Jr., Lawrence M. Baskir, and Lewis W. Evans, counsel; and John Baker, minority counsel.

Senator Ervin. The subcommittee will come to order. I have a statement which I propose to read. It is somewhat long, but since George Washington fought for 7 years to gain freedom for the Americans, I think the least I can do is to try to do what I can for about 45 minutes to preserve the freedom of the people and I hope to do so.

It will probably take me about 40 minutes to read my statement. I regret that I didn't have the statement completed in time to give you advance notice so you wouldn't have to be here quite as early as you came,

Today the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights begins hearings on S. 3296, the administration's proposed Civil Rights Act of 1966, and six other civil rights bills: s. 1497, S. 1654, S. 2845, S. 2846, S. 2923, and S. 3170; and an amendment I have introduced on behalf of myself and Senator Fulbright in the nature of an additional title to S. 3296. The amendment is designed to define title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 according to the intent of Congress and Federal court decisions. The texts of these bills, an analysis of S. 2923, S. 2845, and S. 3296, the text of my amendment and an analysis of it, will be printed at this point in the record.

(The documents referred to follow :)

ANALYSIS OF AMENDMENT No. 561 TO S. 3296 The amendment would redesignate Title VI of S. 3296 as Title VII thereof, and redesignate Sections 601 and 602 thereof as Sections 701 and 702, respectively. Immediately after Title V the following new Title is inserted: Title VI-Civil Rights Act amendment.

This amendment amends Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by adding & new section. Section 606(a) provides that no funds can be withheld under any Federal program until a constitutional or statutory violation has been committed by the recipient of the benefits of such programs. Such violation must be established by substantial evidence.

Subsection (b) provides that in making a determination with respect to alleged violations, the particular Federal agency must follow the same procedural require


ments as in the case of all other administrative adjudications. The recipient of such benefits, therefore, must be accorded not only notice of the intention to withhold funds but also the opportunity to be heard and to present evidence in its own behalf.

Subsection (c) provides that in order to support a determination of discrimination it must be shown that there has been an affirmative intent to exclude or the necessary effect of exclusion of individuals from benefits on the basis of race, color or national origin.

Subsection (d) prohibits any Federal agency from exercising control over any school, hospital or other institution under the provisions of Title VI for any purpose other than to provide equal opportunity for access thereto by individuals without regard to race, color or national origin. Secondly, this subsection provides that no class of individuals shall be deprived of the privilege of determining voluntarily whether or not to avail themselves of any benefit provided by any program or activity financed or partially financed by the Federal Government.

(From the Library of Congress Legislative Reference Service, May 3, 1966)

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF S. 2923; H.R. 12845 (By Raymond J. Celada, legislative attorney, American Law Division) This bill, an omnibus measure, contains various proposals designed to deal with several problems relating to civil rights and the impartial administration of justice: specifically, discrimination in jury selection and the failure to adequately protect Negroes and civil rights workers. Generally, the provisions intended to improve jury selection procedures would set up jury commissions in each federal district court, which would effectuate a sampling plan approved by the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts which would furnish a representative crosssection of the district without regard to race, color, sex, political or religious affiliation, or economic or social status. Provision also is made for improving jury selection procedures in those states that have practiced discrimination on account of race or color.

The provisions of the bill intended to protect Negroes and civil rights workers establish or strengthen several avenues of remedial relief. First, the bill would vest jurisdiction in the federal courts (or allow removal of prosecutions commenced in state courts) of certain crimes when necessary to secure the equal protection of the laws. Second, it would broaden the scope of the existing law relating to conspiracies to interfere with civil rights (18' U.S.C. 241). Third, it would authorize injunctive relief where necessary to safeguard persons in the exercise of their constitutional rights. Fourth, it would authorize the removal of civil and criminal cases to the federal courts in order to protect the defendant's constitutional rights. Fifth, it would provide for indemnifying persons suffering injuries to their persons or property for exercising rights protected by the Constitution. Sixth, it would extend the Equal Employment Opportunity provisions to cover state and local governments.

The bill is short titled “The Civil Rights Protection Act of 1966.”

TITLE I-JURY SELECTION IN FEDERAL AND STATE COURTS Section 101(a) of the bill rewrites 28 U.S.C. 1864, relating to the manner of drawing federal juries, to establish in each judicial district a jury commission consisting of the clerk of court or a qualified deputy clerk and one or more commissioners to be appointed by the court. Persons designated jury commissioners must be U.S. citizens and residents of the district in which they are to serve.

In addition, they must be of a different political party than the clerk or deputy clerk who is serving on the commission. If several commissioners are appointed, individual commissioners may be required to serve at each place within the district where the court is authorized to try cases. Temporary commissioners may be appointed to serve during the absence of regular commissioners.

(b) Subparagraph (i) of section 101(b) provides that the chief judge of the district shall supervise the jury commission in the performance of its duties.

Subparagraph (ii) requires the jury commission to effectuate a "sampling plan” approved by the chief judge and the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts which would furnish a representative cross-section of the population of the district without regard to race, color, sex, political or religious affiliation, or economic or social status. The Director of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts is authorized to consult with the Census Bureau,

Subparagraph (iii) requires the names of three hundred qualified persons to be placed in the repository ("jury box, wheel or similar device") from which grand and petit juries are drawn. These names would be selected by public drawing from the pool of names obtained under a qualified plan.

Subparagraph (iv) requires jurors to be selected at a public drawing by chance from such repository.

Subparagraph (v) authorizes the jury commission to employ all appropriate means, including questionnaires and the administration of oaths, to determine the qualifications of jurors. The means adopted to determine whether persons are qualified to serve as jurors are subject to the approval of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts. Questionnaires may be filled out by the prospective juror or by some other person in his behalf. Personnel of the clerk's office may be utilized to assist the jury commission in the performance of its duties.

(c) The jury commission is required to retain all records for four years. The bill specifically requires the retention of records of the names obtained pursuant to an approved sampling plan, the names of persons placed in the repository from which jurors are drawn, completed questionnaires, the names and race of persons drawn for jury service, the names of persons performing jury services and the dates thereof, and any other records which may be requested by the chief judge.

(d) Any citizen residing in, or any litigant in a judicial district, or the Attorney General of the United States, may obtain judicial review of the jury selection procedures or recordkeeping requirements imposed by this bill by applying to the court of appeals for the judicial circuit in which the district court concerned is located. If it is shown that the challenged district court's jury selection procedures or recordkeeping are not in conformity with the requirements of this bill, the court of appeals may appoint and supervise jury commissioners in order to secure compliance therewith. Either the court or a master may take evidence in connection with any action pursuant to this subsection.

(e) The court of appeals, on its own motion or upon application of the Chief judge of the affected judicial district, may reinstate the latter's control over jury selection procedures when there is reasonable cause to believe that they will be administered in accordance with the requirements of this bill.

(f) Jury commissioners who are appointed to serve on a part-time basis are to be paid $25 per day. Payment is to be made upon presentation of a certificate of the chief judge of the district.

Jury commissioners who are appointed on a full-time basis are to be paid a salary fixed by the Judicial Conference at a rate which corresponds to that provided by the Classification Act for comparable positions in the executive branch of the government.

Travel and subsistence expenses are authorized when the conduct of official business requires a jury commissioner to be away from his designated post of duty.

(g) The chief judge may assign any of the powers and duties conferred on him by this bill to another judge in the district. For purposes of this bill, any judge who, by agreement or court order, customarily holds court in one particular part of a district shall exercise the powers and duties of chief judge in such part of the judicial district.

Section 102 amends 28 U.S.C. 1861 (2) to eliminate the literacy qualifications for federal jurors.

Section 103 amends 28 U.S.C. 1863, relating to exclusion or excuse from jury service, to authorize federal judges to exclude illiterate jurors from particular cases where the ability to read or write English is a significant factor. However, no person is to be excluded on grounds of illiteracy if he has completed the sixth grade in an English language school.

Section 104 amends 28 U.S.C. 1871, relating to juror's fees, to increase the fee for attendance from $10 to $15 per day or loss of pay, whichever is greater, and where jurors are required to serve in one case for more than 30 days to increase the allowable attendance fee from $14 to $20 per day or loss of pay, whichever is greater. The bill also increases the amount authorized for subsistence from $10 to the "subsistence allowance given to federal employees.” (i.e., reasonable value of quarters and facilities -as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3123). JURY SELECTION IN STATE COURTS

Section 105 requires state and local courts to maintain the following records: for four years: (1) names of all persons on the jury list; (2) names of persons placed in the repository from which jurors are drawn; (3) questionnaires, applications, or documents of any sort used in jury selection; (4) names and race of persons drawn for jury service; (5) names of persons performing jury service and the dates of such service; (6) such additional records as the judges of the court may direct.

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »