Alleging a course of racially discriminatory practices
calculated to deprive Negro citizens of their voting rights, the
United States brought an action for declaratory and injunctive
relief under the Civil Rights Act of 1957 against the Board of
Registrars of an Alabama county, the individual members thereof and
the State of Alabama. The District Court dismissed the complaint,
holding,
inter alia, that the Civil Rights Act of 1957 did
not authorize the action against the State. The Court of Appeals
affirmed, and this Court granted certiorari. Before the case was
heard in this Court, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 was amended so as
expressly to authorize such actions to be brought against a
State.
Held: by virtue of that amendment, which is to be
applied to this case, the District Court now has jurisdiction to
entertain this action against the State. Accordingly, both of the
judgments below are vacated, and the case is remanded to the
District Court with instructions to reinstate the action as to the
State. Pp.
362 U. S.
602-604.
267 F.2d 808, judgments vacated and case remanded.
PER CURIAM.
Alleging a course of racially discriminatory practices
calculated to deprive Negro citizens of their voting rights in
violation of the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States and Part IV of the Civil
Page 362 U. S. 603
Rights Act of 1957, 71 Stat. 637, 42 U.S.C. § 1971(a), [
Footnote 1] the United States,
proceeding under 42 U.S.C. § 1971(c), [
Footnote 2] brought this action against the Board of
Registrars of Macon County, Alabama, and the two individual
respondents as members thereof, for declaratory and injunctive
relief. Thereafter, the Government amended its complaint so as to
join the State of Alabama as a party defendant.
The District Court dismissed the complaint as to all defendants.
It held (1) that the individual respondents had been sued only as
Registrars, and that, having, under Alabama law, effectively
resigned their offices, they were not suable in their official
capacities; (2) that the Board of Registrars was not a suable legal
entity; and (3) that the Civil Rights Act of 1957 did not authorize
this action against the State.
171 F.
Supp. 720. The Court of Appeals, sustaining each of these
holdings, affirmed. 267
Page 362 U. S. 604
F.2d 808. Because of the importance of the issues involved, we
brought the case here. 361 U.S. 893.
Shortly before the case was heard in this Court on May 2, 1960,
Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1960. The bill was signed
by the President on May 6, 1960, and has now become law. Act of May
6, 1960, 74 Stat. 86. Among other things, § 601(b) of that Act
amends 42 U.S.C. § 1971(c) by expressly authorizing actions such as
this to be brought against a State. [
Footnote 3] Under familiar principles, the case must be
decided on the basis of law now controlling, and the provisions of
§ 601(b) are applicable to this litigation.
American Steel
Foundries v. Tri-City Central Trades Council, 257 U.
S. 184,
257 U. S. 201;
Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U. S. 52,
312 U. S. 60;
see also Reynolds v. United States, 292 U.
S. 443,
292 U. S. 449.
We hold that, by virtue of the provisions of that section, the
District Court has jurisdiction to entertain this action against
the State. In so holding, we do not reach, or intimate any view
upon, any of the issues decided below, the merits of the
controversy, or any defenses, constitutional or otherwise, that may
be asserted by the State.
Accordingly, the judgments of the Court of Appeals and the
District Court will be vacated, and the case remanded to the
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama with instructions
to reinstate the action as to the State of Alabama, and for further
proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
[
Footnote 1]
Section 1 of the Fifteenth Amendment provides:
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be
denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account
of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
42 U.S.C. § 1971(a) provides:
"All citizens of the United States who are otherwise qualified
by law to vote at any election by the people in any State,
Territory, district, county, city, parish, township, school
district, municipality, or other territorial subdivision, shall be
entitled and allowed to vote at all such elections, without
distinction of race, color, or previous condition of servitude; any
constitution, law, custom, usage, or regulation of any State or
Territory, or by or under its authority, to the contrary
notwithstanding."
[
Footnote 2]
42 U.S.C. § 1971(c) provides:
"Whenever any person has engaged or there are reasonable grounds
to believe that any person is about to engage in any act or
practice which would deprive any other person of any right or
privilege secured by subsection (a) . . . the Attorney General may
institute for the United States, or in the name of the United
States, a civil action or other proper proceeding for preventive
relief, including an application for a permanent or temporary
injunction, restraining order, or other order. In any proceeding
hereunder, the United States shall be liable for costs the same as
a private person."
[
Footnote 3]
Section 601(b) provides:
"Whenever, in a proceeding instituted under this subsection [42
U.S.C. § 1971(c)]. any official of a State or subdivision thereof
is alleged to have committed any act or practice constituting a
deprivation of any right or privilege secured by subsection (a),
the act or practice shall also be deemed that of the State and the
State may be joined as a party defendant and, if, prior to the
institution of such proceeding, such official has resigned or has
been relieved of his office and no successor has assumed such
office, the proceeding may be instituted against the State."