The Green caldron - University Library

December, 1957
THE
What Price Law Enforcement?
Leon Simon
Rhetoric 102, Theme 6
WHITE CITIZENS' COUNCILS OF THE SOUTH ARE OR-
ganized primarily for one purpose. That purpose is to oppose and fight
against the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning
segregation in the public schools. Some integrationists believe the White
Citizens' Councils should be outlawed, since they openly oppose the law established
by the Supreme Court's decision. Other people, including many
segregationists and even some integrationists, believe that the councils should
be allowed to exist as long as they do not use or advocate violence.
The actual issue of integration is relatively unimportant in the controversy
concerning the proposed banishment of the councils. The main argument in
the controversy involves the question of whether or not the councils have a
constitutional right to exist. The constitutional rights in question are freedom
of speech and the rights of petition and assembly.
For the purpose of this discussion freedom of speech shall be defined as
the right of an individual or of a group to express his or their thoughts as
long as they do not act to infringe upon the rights of others. The right of pe-
tition and assembly shall be defined as the right of a group to assemble and
work towards a common legal goal by the means of petition and through
other legal means.
The freedom of speech of the councils has been disclaimed by the councils'
opponents on the contention that by opposing the law the councils infringe
on the rights of the Negroes who are unlawfully segregated. It is a meaningless
fanatical cry to claim that those councils which peacefully oppose the law
through legal means are actually infringing on anybody's rights. If
peaceful vocal disapproval were actually infringement on the rights of others,
a person could lose his freedom of speech by speaking against the right of
women to vote. He would be infringing on the rights of women in precisely
the same manner as the citizens' councils are said to infringe on the rights of
the Negroes. Shortly after the right of women to vote was established, many
men spoke against it, but there certainly was no widespread belief that they
were abusing their freedom of speech in doing so.
The question then arises as to whether or not it is legal to work against
a federal law. It certainly is legal ! An
outstanding example of a successful
fight against federal law was the fight against prohibition which ended with
the repeal of the prohibition amendment. The laws of our country are
flexible and continually changing. Few people question the right of others
to fight against existing laws, such as those concerning capital punishment,
tax laws, and tariff laws. A law established by a Supreme Court decision
29