of Danville, No. 9080, both decided January 21, 1966 by the Fourth Circuit, the court refused to order removal on two grounds-first, that First and Fourteenth Amendment rights generally are not within the protection of the present reinoval statute, and second, that the inability to enforce one's right in the State court must be shown with certainty. In both cases, the court held that the Rives-Powers line of cases (supra n. 15) are still good law and noted that when Congress made remands appealable, it did not seek to change the scope of the removal statute.

23 See further discussion in the article by Amsterdam in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, supra n. 22, at pages 832-35.

24 It should be noted that these figures embrace several States, in some of which unusual delays in civil rights cases have been nominal or non-existent. Moreover, these figures reflect only those cases which have been fully completed, and prosecution in large numbers on account of demonstration activity is a relatively recent phenomenon. There are over 1,100 current unclosed cases in the Fund files, and the average age of these cases, even counting those just begun, is 30.3 months. 25 See Lusky, Racial Discrimination and the Federal Law: A Problem in Nullification, 63 Col. L. Rev. 1163, 1179-1182 (1963).

26 See Toucey v. New York Life Ins. Co., 314 U.S. 118, 129–141 (1941); Warren, Federal and State Court Interference, 43 Harv. L. Rev. 345 (1930); Taylor & Willis, The Power of Federal Courts to Enjoin Proceedings in State Courts, 42 Yale L. J. 1169 (1933); Durfee & Sloss, Federal Injunction Against Proceedings in State Courts: Life History of a Statute, 30 Mich. L. Rev. 1145 (1932); Note, Federal Power to Enjoin State Court Proceedings, 74 Harv. L. Rev. 726 (1961).

27 Douglas v. City of Jeannete, 319 U.S. 157, 163 (1943); see also Wells v. Hand, 238 F. Supp. 779 (M.D. Ga., 1965), aff'd, 382 U.S. 39 (1965).

28 See Wells Fargo & Co. v. Taylor, 254 U.S. 175, 183 (1920); Toucey v. New York Life Ins. Co., supra n. 26, at 134-139.

29 French v. Hay, 89 U.S. (22 Wall.) 238, 250, 253 (1875) (two cases); Toucey v. New York Life Ins. Co., supra n. 26, at 132–134; Bowles v. Willingham, 321 U.S. 503 (1944); Porter v. Dicken, 328 U.S. 252 (1946).

30 Act of April 20, 1871, Ch. 22, §1, 17 Stat. 13; R.S. §1979; 42 U.S.C. §1983.

31 Cooper v. Hutchinson, 184 F. 2d 119 (3d Cir. 1950). On motions for temporary injunctions in Tuchman v. Welch, 42 Fed. 548 (C.C.D. Kan. 1890), and M. Schandler Bottling Company v. Welch, 42 Fed. 561 (C.C.D. Kan. 1890), it was held that the predecessor to 42 U.S.C. §1983 provided the necessary statutory authorization for federal equity jurisdiction notwithstanding the prohibition contained in the predecessor to 28 U.S.C. §2283, but on subsequent demurrers the temporary injunctions were dissolved and the bills dismissed for want of equity in Hemsley v. Myers, 45 Fed. 283 (C.C.D. Kan. 1891).

32 Baines v. City of Danville, 337 F. 2d 579 (4th Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 381 U.S. 939 (1965).

33 Sexton v. Barry, 233 F. 2d 220 (6th Cir. 1956), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 870. 34 Goss v. Illinois, 312 F. 2d 257 (7th Cir. 1963).

35 Dilworth v. Riner, 343 F. 2d 226 (5th Cir. 1965).

36 The following are some of the citations of these various decisions: Bailey v. Patterson, 199 F. Supp. 595, 612-13 (S.D. Miss. 1961), vacated and rev'd, 369 U.S. 31 (1962); 206 F. Supp. 67 (S.D. Miss. 1962), rev'd in part, 323 F. 2d 201 (5th Cir. 1963), cert. denied sub nom. City of Jackson v. Bailey, 376 U.S. 910 (1964).

37 380 U.S. 479 (1965); see also Cameron v. Johnson, 244 F. Supp. 846, vacated and remanded, 381 U.S. 741 (1965).

38 Dombrowski v. Pfister, supra n. 37 at 380 U.S. 489-90.

39 See discussion in Lusky, Racial Discrimination and the Federal Law: A Problem in Nullification, 63 Col. L. Rev. 1163-1177 (1963).

40 See Lane v. Wilson, 307 U.S. 268 (1939); Mills v. Board of Education, 30 F. Supp. 245 (D. Md. 1939); Thompson v. Gibbes, 60 F. Supp. 872 (E.D. S.C. 1945); Stapleton v. Mitchell, 60 F. Supp. 51 (D. Kan. 1945), appeal dismissed sub nom. Mitchell v. McElroy, 326 U.S. 690; see also Hague v. CIO, 307 U.S. 496 (1939).

41 A possible correlation between the two remedies may arise in a Freedom Rider situation, where arrests are made and trials held over a period of weeks. It is conceivable that the first group arrested might remove and obtain a final adjudication of the unconstitutionality of the statute under which the arrests were made. If the State continued to press the prosecutions, an injunction would be available. 42 Boman v. Birmingham Transit Company, 280 F. 2d 531, 535 (5th Cir. 1960).

TABLE OF CASES

Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S. 31 (1962).

Baines v. City of Danville, 337 F. 2d 579 (4th Cir. 1964) cert. denied, 381 U.S. 939 (1965).

Boman v. Birmingham Transit Company, 280 F. 2d 531, 535 (5th Circ. 1960). Bowles v. Willingham, 321 U.S. 503 (1944).

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

Cameron v. Johnson, 244 F. Supp. 846, vacated and remanded, 381 U.S. 741 (1965).

Collins v. Frisbie, 189 F. 2d 464 (6th Cir. 1951) aff'd, 342 U.S. 519 (1952).
Commonwealth of Virginia v. Wallace, No. 9462.

Cooper v. Hutchinson, 184 F. 2d 119 (3d Cir. 1950).
Cox v. Louisiana, 348 F. 2d 750 (5th Cir. 1965).
Cunningham v. Neagle, 135 U.S. 1 (1890).
Dilworth v. Riner, 343 F. 2d 226 (5th Cir. 1963).
Douglas v. City of Jeannete, 319 U.S. 157, 163 (1943).
Dombrowski v. Pfister, 380 U.S. 479 (1965).

Ex Parte Kieffer, 40 Fed. 399 (C.C.D. Kan. 1889).

Ex Parte Royall, 117 U.S.C. 241 (1886).

Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S.C. 391 (1963).

French v. Hay, 89 U.S. (22 Wall.) 238, 250, 253 (1875) (two cases).

Goss v. Illinois, 312 F. 2d 257 (7th Cir. 1963).

Hague v. CIO, 307 U.S. 496 (1939).

Hemsley v. Myers, 45 Fed. 283 (C.C.D. Kan. 1891).

Hillegas v. Sams, 349 F. 2d 859 (5th Cir. 1965).

In re Sam Kee, 31 Fed. 680 (C.C.N.D. Cal. 1887).

In re Loney, 134 U.S. 372 (1890).

In re Shuttlesworth, 369 U.S. 35 (1962).

In re Lee Sing, 43 Fed. 359 (C.C.N.D. Cal. 1890).

Johnston v. Marsh, 227 F. 2d 528 (3d Cir. 1955).

Kentucky v. Powers, 201 U.S. 1 (1906).

Lane v. Wilson, 307 U.S. 268 (1939).

McMeans v. Mayor's Court, 247 F. Supp. 606 (M.D. Ala. 1965).

M. Schandler Bottling Company v. Welch, 42 Fed. 561 (C.C.D. Kan. 1890).
Mills v. Board of Education, 30 F. Supp. 245 (D. Md. 1939).

Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370 (1881).

New York v. Galamison, 342 F. 2d 255 (2d Cir. 1965) cert. denied, 380 U.S. 977. Ohio v. Thomas, 173 U.S. 276 (1899).

Peacock v. The City of Greenwood, 347 F. 2d 679 (5th Cir. 1965), cert. granted, 15 L. Ed. 2d 464 (1966).

Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896).

Porter v. Dickens, 328 U.S. 252 (1946).

Rachel v. Georgia, 342 F. 2d (5th Cir. 1965), 336, cert. granted, 15 L. Ed. 2d 58 (1966).

Sexton v. Barry, 233 F. 2d 220 (6th Cir. 1956), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 870.

1012

Stapleton v. Mitchell, 60 F. Supp. 51 (D. Kan. 1945), appeal dismissed sub nom.

Mitchell v. McElroy, 326 U.S. 690.

Thompson v. Gibbes, 60 F. Supp. 872 (E.D. S.C. 1945).

Thompson v. The City of Louisville, 362 U.S. 391.

Toucey v. New York Life Ins. Co., 314 U.S. 118, 129-141 (1941).

Tuchman v. Welch, 42 Fed. 548 (C.C.D. Kan. 1890).

United States v. Hamilton, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 17 (1765).

Virginia v. Rives, 100 U.S. 313 (1880).

Wells v. Hand, 238 F. Supp. 779 (M.D. Ga., 1965) aff'd, 382 U.S. 39 (1965).

Wells Fargo & Co. v. Taylor, 254 U.S. 175, 183 (1920).

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS

28 U.S.C. § 1443.

28 U.S.C. § 1447.

28 U.S.C.

2441.

28 U.S.C. §2254.

28 U.S.C.2283.

42 U.S.C.

1983.

Act of September 24, 1789, Ch. 20, § 12, 1 Stat. 79-80.

Act of March 2, 1793, 1 Stat. 335.

Act of April 9, 1866, Ch. 31, § 14 Stat. 27.

Act of February 5, 1867, Ch. 28 § 1, 14 Stat. 385-86.

Act of April 20, 1871, Ch. 22 § 1, 17 Stat.; R.S. § 1979; 42 U.S.C. 1983.
Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Voting Rights Act of 1965, 79 Stat. 437.

OTHER SOURCES

Amsterdam, "Criminal Prosecution Affecting Federally Guaranteed Civil Rights, Federal Removal and Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction to Abort State Court Trials," 113 U. of Pa. L. Rev. 793, 851-52 (1965).

"Judge Learned Hand and the Interpretation of Statutes," 60 Harv. L. Rev. 370 (1947).

"Law Enforcement-A Report on Equal Protection in the South"-United States Commission on Civil Rights, pp. 62-83 (1965).

Lusky, "Racial Discrimination and the Federal Law: A Problem in Nullification," 63 Col. L. Rev. 1163, 1179–82.

Warren, "Federal and State Court Interference," 43 Harv. L. Rev. 345 (1930). Taylor & Willis, "The Power of Federal Courts to Enjoin Proceedings in State Courts," 42 Yale L. J. 1169 (1933).

Durfee & Sloss, "Federal Injunction Against Proceedings in State Courts: Life History of a Statute," 30 Mich. L. Rev. 1145 (1932).

"Federal Power to Enjoin State Court Proceedings," 74 Harv. L. Rev. 726 (1961).

TO confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of the United States over certain classes of removed cases and to provide injunctive relief in certain cases, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Civil Rights Procedure Act."

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

(a) The Congress has over the last century adopted legislation declaring, protecting, and granting various civil rights to citizens. It is the sense of Congress that some citizens seeking to avail themselves of these declared rights have been subjected to lengthy and expensive criminal proscutions instituted to deter them from attempting to obtain their civil rights. It is further the sense of Congress that the proper means to correct this unlawful activity is to vest appropriate jurisdiction in the district courts of the United States.

(b) It is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress and the purpose of this legislation to promote the general welfare by preventing reprisals against those who seek to end discrimination on account of race, color, religion or national origin prohibited by the Constitution or laws of the United States.