Theodore GIBSON, as next friend for Theodore Gibson, Jr., et al., Appellants, v. BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al., Appellees

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit1957-07-23No. No. 16482

246 F.2d 913

Summary · law.co

Holding. The district court's dismissal of the complaint was erroneous. The judgment is reversed and remanded because the children stated a justiciable controversy challenging the board's unconstitutional policy of racial segregation, and they were not required to exhaust administrative remedies or apply to specific schools before seeking relief.

Black children in Dade County, Florida sought declaratory and injunctive relief against the school board's policy of maintaining racially segregated public schools, arguing this violated their constitutional rights under Brown v. Board of Education. The school board refused the children's request to desegregate and instead adopted a policy continuing operation on a segregated basis. The district court dismissed the case, reasoning that the children had failed to apply for admission to specific schools and had not exhausted administrative remedies under Florida law.

The appellate court reversed, finding that the complaint presented a justiciable controversy despite the absence of individual applications to particular schools. Because the school board had announced a clear policy of racial segregation, requiring the children to apply to non-segregated schools first would have been futile, and equity does not mandate such meaningless steps. Furthermore, no state law regarding administrative remedies could justify or override the constitutional violation created by the requirement of racial segregation itself.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether a class action challenging a school board's segregation policy states a justiciable controversy without individual applications to particular schools
Whether exhaustion of administrative remedies is required before challenging a constitutionally violative segregation policy
Whether state pupil assignment laws can justify or delay relief from racial segregation in public schools

Procedural posture

The appellants appealed the district court's dismissal of their class action complaint challenging Dade County's policy of racial segregation in public schools.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

RIVES, Circuit Judge.

Negro children eligible to attend the public schools of Dade County, Florida, by their parents as next friends, filed a class action alleging irreparable injury and deprivation of their constitutional rights by the Board of Public Instruction and the Superintendent of Public Schools of that County. The complaint averred that each of the children seeks admission to the public schools of the County without racial segregation; that the defendants maintain and supervise such schools “under a system which provides certain schools for the education of white children only and others for the education of colored children only”; that the plaintiffs have petitioned the Board of Public Instruction to abolish racial segregation in the public schools of the County as soon as is practicable in conformity with the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Brown v. Board of Education, 1955, 349 U.S. 294, 75 S.Ct. 753, 99 L.Ed. 1083, but that the Board has refused and, instead adheres to a statement of policy in part as follows:

“It is deemed by the Board that the best interest of the pupils and the orderly and efficient administration of the school system can best be preserved if the registration and attendance of pupils entering school commencing the current school term remains unchanged. Therefore, the Superintendent, principals and all other personnel concerned are herewith advised that until further notice the free public school system of Dade County will continue to be operated, maintained and conducted on a nonintegrated basis.”

The complaint prayed for declaratory and injunctive relief.

Upon motion of the defendants, the district court dismissed the complaint holding that it did not set forth a justiciable case or controversy, and did not allege that the plaintiffs had sought admission to any particular school or had been denied the right to attend any school because of their race.

The issue of justiciable controversy under such a complaint has been settled in Bush v. Orleans Parish School Board, D.C.E.D.La.1956, 138 F.Supp. 337, 340, affirmed by this Court in 5 Cir., 1957, 242 F.2d 156.

Under the circumstances alleged, it was not necessary for the plaintiffs to make application for admission to a particular school. As said by Chief Judge Parker of the Fourth Circuit in School Board of City of Charlottesville, Va. v. Allen, 4 Cir., 1956, 240 F.2d 59, 63, 64:

“Defendants argue, in this connection, that plaintiffs have not shown themselves entitled to injunctive relief because they have not individually applied for admission to any particular school and been denied admission. The answer is that in view of the announced policy of the respective school boards any such application to a school other than a segregated school maintained for Colored people would have been futile; and equity does not require the doing of a vain thing as a condition of relief.” 240 F.2d at pages 63, 64.

The appellees urge also that the judgment should be affirmed because the plaintiffs have not exhausted their administrative remedies under the Florida Pupil Assignment Law of 1956, Chapter 31380, Laws of Florida, Second Extraordinary Session 1956, F.S.A. § 230.-231. Neither that nor any other law can justify a violation of the Constitution of the United States by the requirement of racial segregation in the public schools. So long as that requirement continues throughout the public school system of Dade County, it would be premature to consider the effect of the Florida laws as to the assignment of pupils to particular schools.

The district court erred in dismissing the complaint. Its judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

. Tlie opinion of the district court is reported in 2 Race Relations Law Reporter at p. 9.

. The district court said:

“Defendants also move to dismiss on the ground that no justiciable controversy is presented by the pleadings. This motion is without merit. The complaint plainly states that plaintiffs are being deprived of their constitutional rights by being required by the defendants to attend segregated schools, and that they have petitioned the defendant Board in vain to comply with the ruling of the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, supra. The defendants admit that they are maintaining segregation in the public schools under their supervision pursuant to tbe state statutes and the article of the Constitution of Louisiana in suit. If this issue does not present a justiciable controversy, it is difficult to conceive of one.” 138 F.Supp. at page 340.

. This Court said:

“Appellees were not seeking specific assignment to particular schools. They, as Negro students, were seeking an end to a local school board rule that required segregation of all Negro students from all white students. As patrons of the Orleans Parish school system they are undoubtedly entitled to have the district court pass on their right to seek relief.” 242 E.2d at page 162.