Barr v. City of Columbia
Encyclopedia
Barr v. Columbia, 378 U.S. 146 (1964), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
reversed the convictions of five African American
s who were refused service at a lunch counter of a department store based upon a prior Court decision, holding that there was insufficient evidence to support a breach of peace conviction and that criminal trespass convictions would be reversed for the reasons stated in another case that was decided that same day, Bouie v. City of Columbia
, 378 U.S. 347 (1964). Bouie held that retroactive application of expanded construction of a criminal statute was barred by due process
of ex post facto laws.
, South Carolina
, and sat down at its lunch counter and waited for service. The department store allowed persons of all races to use all facilities except for the lunch counter, which served whites only. The store manager has arranged for police to be present for any sit-in
demonstrators, and then, consistent with the restaurant's policy of refusing service to blacks, the restaurant manager requested the persons to leave. When they refused, they were arrested for breach of peace and criminal trespass. At trial the defendants their arrest, prosecution, and conviction by the state for requesting service at a restaurant that refused service to African Americans would violate the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause
s of the Fourteenth Amendment
. The trial court convicted the students, and the Supreme Court of South Carolina affirmed in an unreported decision.
Regarding the trespass convictions, the majority opinion
by Justice Black did not reach the broad question posed by the defendants as to "whether the Fourteenth Amendment of its own force forbids a State to arrest and prosecute those who, having been asked to leave a restaurant because of their color, refuse to do so." Instead, the Court considered its ruling in Bouie v. City of Columbia, which had been announced the same day, which found that the South Carolina Supreme Court had expanded the scope of acts that were covered under its criminal trespass statute. The Supreme Court om that case held that retroactive application of this expanded scope violated due process as an ex post facto law, and the Barr decision references that decision for its holding.
The concurring opinion of Justice Douglas simply stated that he would reverse based upon his opinions in Bell v. Maryland
, 378 U.S. 226 (1964), another case involving a sit-in demonstration by African American students that was announced the same day as the Barr decision. Justice Goldberg, joined by Chief Justice Warren, stated that they would reverse for the reasons stated in the majority opinion in Bell. Justices Black, Harlan, and White stated that they dessented for the same reasons stated in their Bouie dessent, that the actions in the restaurant did not constitute state action
.
, 378 U.S. 130 (1964), Robinson v. Florida
, 378 U.S. 153 (1964), Bouie v. City of Columbia, and Bell v. Maryland. In none of these cases did the Supreme Court reach the merits of any argument addressing whether private actions of segregation which are enforced by state courts constituted a state action which violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. These decisions were announced two days after the Senate
ended a filibuster
and passed the bill which would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964
, which outlawed segregation in public accommodations. It has been suggested that the Supreme Court refrained from reaching the merits in these cases in consideration of the Act, had it done so it would have eliminated the basis for passage of the Act.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
reversed the convictions of five African American
African American
African Americans are citizens or residents of the United States who have at least partial ancestry from any of the native populations of Sub-Saharan Africa and are the direct descendants of enslaved Africans within the boundaries of the present United States...
s who were refused service at a lunch counter of a department store based upon a prior Court decision, holding that there was insufficient evidence to support a breach of peace conviction and that criminal trespass convictions would be reversed for the reasons stated in another case that was decided that same day, Bouie v. City of Columbia
Bouie v. City of Columbia
Bouie v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 347 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that due process prohibits retroactive application of any judicial construction of a criminal statute that is unexpected and indefensible by reference to the law which has been expressed prior...
, 378 U.S. 347 (1964). Bouie held that retroactive application of expanded construction of a criminal statute was barred by due process
Due process
Due process is the legal code that the state must venerate all of the legal rights that are owed to a person under the principle. Due process balances the power of the state law of the land and thus protects individual persons from it...
of ex post facto laws.
Background
Five African American college students went to a department store in ColumbiaColumbia, South Carolina
Columbia is the state capital and largest city in the U.S. state of South Carolina. The population was 129,272 according to the 2010 census. Columbia is the county seat of Richland County, but a portion of the city extends into neighboring Lexington County. The city is the center of a metropolitan...
, South Carolina
South Carolina
South Carolina is a state in the Deep South of the United States that borders Georgia to the south, North Carolina to the north, and the Atlantic Ocean to the east. Originally part of the Province of Carolina, the Province of South Carolina was one of the 13 colonies that declared independence...
, and sat down at its lunch counter and waited for service. The department store allowed persons of all races to use all facilities except for the lunch counter, which served whites only. The store manager has arranged for police to be present for any sit-in
Sit-in
A sit-in or sit-down is a form of protest that involves occupying seats or sitting down on the floor of an establishment.-Process:In a sit-in, protesters remain until they are evicted, usually by force, or arrested, or until their requests have been met...
demonstrators, and then, consistent with the restaurant's policy of refusing service to blacks, the restaurant manager requested the persons to leave. When they refused, they were arrested for breach of peace and criminal trespass. At trial the defendants their arrest, prosecution, and conviction by the state for requesting service at a restaurant that refused service to African Americans would violate the Due Process and Equal Protection Clause
Equal Protection Clause
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"...
s of the Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the Dred Scott v...
. The trial court convicted the students, and the Supreme Court of South Carolina affirmed in an unreported decision.
Court's Decision
The Supreme Court first considered the breach of peace convictions and noted that the students had simply remained sitting at the lunch counter when asked by the manager to leave. The State had argued that the students simply remaining could cause others to breach the peace when they saw the students. The Court rejected that argument, and did not find that the evidence supported a breach of peace conviction, and reversed.Regarding the trespass convictions, the majority opinion
Majority opinion
In law, a majority opinion is a judicial opinion agreed to by more than half of the members of a court. A majority opinion sets forth the decision of the court and an explanation of the rationale behind the court's decision....
by Justice Black did not reach the broad question posed by the defendants as to "whether the Fourteenth Amendment of its own force forbids a State to arrest and prosecute those who, having been asked to leave a restaurant because of their color, refuse to do so." Instead, the Court considered its ruling in Bouie v. City of Columbia, which had been announced the same day, which found that the South Carolina Supreme Court had expanded the scope of acts that were covered under its criminal trespass statute. The Supreme Court om that case held that retroactive application of this expanded scope violated due process as an ex post facto law, and the Barr decision references that decision for its holding.
The concurring opinion of Justice Douglas simply stated that he would reverse based upon his opinions in Bell v. Maryland
Bell v. Maryland
Bell v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 226 , provided an opportunity for the Supreme Court of the United States to determine whether racial discrimination in the provision of public accommodations by a privately-owned restaurant violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the 14th Amendment to the...
, 378 U.S. 226 (1964), another case involving a sit-in demonstration by African American students that was announced the same day as the Barr decision. Justice Goldberg, joined by Chief Justice Warren, stated that they would reverse for the reasons stated in the majority opinion in Bell. Justices Black, Harlan, and White stated that they dessented for the same reasons stated in their Bouie dessent, that the actions in the restaurant did not constitute state action
State actor
In United States law, a state actor is a person who is acting on behalf of a governmental body, and is therefore subject to regulation under the United States Bill of Rights, including the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which prohibit the federal and state governments from violating...
.
Critical response
Barr v. City of Columbia was one of five cases involving segregation protests decided on June 22, 1964. The other four cases were Griffin v. MarylandGriffin v. Maryland
Griffin v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 130 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the convictions of five African Americans who were arrested during a protest of a privately owned amusement park by a park employee who was also a deputy sheriff...
, 378 U.S. 130 (1964), Robinson v. Florida
Robinson v. Florida
Robinson v. Florida, 378 U.S. 153 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the convictions of several white and African American persons who were refused service at a restaurant based upon a prior Court decision, holding that a Florida regulation requiring a restaurant...
, 378 U.S. 153 (1964), Bouie v. City of Columbia, and Bell v. Maryland. In none of these cases did the Supreme Court reach the merits of any argument addressing whether private actions of segregation which are enforced by state courts constituted a state action which violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. These decisions were announced two days after the Senate
United States Senate
The United States Senate is the upper house of the bicameral legislature of the United States, and together with the United States House of Representatives comprises the United States Congress. The composition and powers of the Senate are established in Article One of the U.S. Constitution. Each...
ended a filibuster
Filibuster
A filibuster is a type of parliamentary procedure. Specifically, it is the right of an individual to extend debate, allowing a lone member to delay or entirely prevent a vote on a given proposal...
and passed the bill which would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a landmark piece of legislation in the United States that outlawed major forms of discrimination against African Americans and women, including racial segregation...
, which outlawed segregation in public accommodations. It has been suggested that the Supreme Court refrained from reaching the merits in these cases in consideration of the Act, had it done so it would have eliminated the basis for passage of the Act.
See also
- African-American Civil Rights Movement (1955–1968)
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 378