Howe Questions Hicks' Victory Claim

Three Harvard professors last night belittled claims of triumph by supporters of the neighborhood school policy in the wake of the Supreme Court's refusal to review a case involving de facto segregation in public schools.

The case had been brought by Negroes in Gary, Ind., who argued that it is unconstitutional for a school board to "acquiesce" in school segregation resulting from housing patterns. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled against the plaintiffs last October, and the Supreme Court refused Monday to review the case.

'Displaying Folly'

"If Mrs. Hicks thinks she's won a victory," Mark DeWolfe Howe '28, professor of Law, declared, "she's once more displaying her folly."

Mrs. Louise Day Hicks, a member of the Boston School Committee, indicated Monday her belief that the court's decision supported "my contention that the N.A.A.C.P. cannot make a legal case" against the Committee's neighborhood school policy.

'Absurd'

Howe called such an interpretation "absurd," adding that the decision has "very, very little significance."

Robert G. McCloskey, professor of Government, agreed with Howe that the decision neither supports nor rejects the neighborhood school policy.

"I don't think it can be interpreted either way," said McCloskey, "which means both sides will interpret it the way they want."

McCloskey warned, however, that the decision may be an expression from the Court of the feeling that "it has already done the lion's share in this country in solving civil rights problems."

Decisions Passed Back

The court may now begin "passing some of these decisions back to the political branch, in a sense, back to us," he said. Nothing in the court's action, he emphasized, "precludes a city from doing something about civil rights."

The Supreme Court, he added, is limited in what it can do. "It can't undertake to correct every injustice."

Thomas F. Pettigrew, associate professor of Social Relations, pointed out in addition that the court's action does not involve a "pure case." The Gary Complainants did not challenge the lower court's findings that racial imbalance in the schools did not result from any official policy of the school board.

Pettigrew also doubted the decision would have much effect on the actions of either civil rights workers or their opponents. "They're going to be swinging at each other anyway," he said.

Only "the most militant side of the Negro Revolution" would regard the decision as signifying the futility of fighting segregation through legal channels, he said.

"We're going to have our troubles this summer," he continued, "but it won't be from this decision."