UNC's role in the desegregation of its programs
Chambers explains the origin of the Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) administration's case against the University of North Carolina. Federal pressures mounted but UNC officials felt they had eliminated the school's racially discriminatory practices. Chambers argues, however, that UNC had not done enough. Instead, he contends that UNC assumed a moderate position, which elevated integration as a goal; but in practice, Chambers asserts that impediments remained in place practically to maintain unequal resources and facilities between blacks and whites.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Julius L. Chambers, June 18, 1990. Interview L-0127. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- WILLIAM LINK:
-
Tell me about the origins of the desegregation case against the
University of North Carolina. There's a lot of history behind
all of it, as there is any form of desegregation or segregation.
- JULIUS L. CHAMBERS:
-
Well, I guess one has to think back to the 1950s, or even earlier, if
you want to, when efforts were made by individual blacks to gain
admission to the University. And they were initially rejected and later
ordered to ߞthe University was later ordered to admit these
candidates. And we had a few blacks admitted to Chapel Hill and all over
the state, in Greensboro, but the numbers were extremely smaller. And we
had six traditionally black institutions that were about 100 percent
black. Maybe ninety-nine point nine percent. We had real problems in
terms of the financial support from the state for these institutions.
And we had really the clear remnants of the past segregation by the
state and higher ed, despite the admission of a few blacks to Chapel
Hill, or Greensboro, or Raleigh. And that was typical
of what was happening in the other southern states that had traditional
black institutions of higher ed. Virginia, for example, had its Virginia
State, and Norfolk. South Carolina had its South Carolina State. And one
could go down the list. In 1969, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed a
proceeding in Washington challenging the continued funding by the
federal government of segregated institutions, not only of higher
education, but elementary, secondary schools as well. So that law suit,
then called Adams versusߞI've forgotten who he
wasߞFence, who was then Secretary. The Nixon administration
had announced that it would not enforce Title VI, which prohibited
funding of segregated programs. And based on that policy, and the
programs of the Nixon administration, we filed a law suit asking the
court to enjoin the Federal government to enforce Title VI. And that
litigation grew and changed under each of the new secretaries. But it
was designed to require the Federal government direct the states that
were receiving Federal funds eliminate the vestiges of past
discrimination in higher ed, among others. And growing out of that the
court issued an order, and the then Department of Health and Education,
directed each of these states, including North Carolina, to come in with
a plan for the elimination of discrimination in higher ed. And North
Carolina initially resisted, contending that the
University was not discriminating. And the Board of Governors became
very involved in the University's and the state's
response to the Health and Education Department's directive
that the state come in with a plan. Some members of the board felt that
the University had done all that it needed to do to comply with the
mandates of Brown or the constitution. Some others, including myself,
felt that the state had woefully failed to do what was necessary to not
only ensure equal opportunities in admission for minority students to
these institutions, but also to enhance the traditionally black
institutions, to make them competitive entities within the university
setting. And that was sort of the stageߞwe got into an
extended debates and arguments about what the roleߞwhat role
the University should play in opening up opportunity. Friday, I think,
maybe for political reasons or whatever, took a rather strong position
that the University had done all that it needed to do. And you
couldn't force minority students to go to Chapel Hill, or
whatever other traditional white institution you were talking about. And
that they had done as much as was necessary to enhance the traditionally
black institution. On the other hand, a number of people argued that
A&T, and North Carolina Central, and Elizabeth City,
Fayetteville, any other traditionally black institutions, were just
there, underfunded and not allowed to play an equal
role in providing the educational programs. And that debate continued
through the settlement that was finally reached, I guess, with the state
and the federal government after Reagan took office. I guess that would
have been in the 1980s. '81 And the debate is still going on.
- WILLIAM LINK:
-
Was thereߞI gather there was a spectrum of opinion on the
Board of Governors about this issue. Some people who wanted to do
nothing. Some people who wanted to do a little. Some people who wanted
to do more. Some people who wanted to do a lot. Is that a ߞ
- JULIUS L. CHAMBERS:
-
Yeah.
- WILLIAM LINK:
-
. . .and coalition building. And I guess then Friday had to build
aߞor Friday did build a consensus which was somewhere along
the middle, or somewhere right in the middle, perhaps?
- JULIUS L. CHAMBERS:
-
Uh. Where would you put it? Maybe right in the middle. Or somewhere
between the middle and right on the middle. It wasn't the
extreme position that some people advocated, telling the government to
go to hell. It was more, "Here, look, we are proposing to do A,
B, C, or D." "We got like an open
enrollment in the sense that people could apply to go wherever they
wanted to go. We will provide some small funding support for promoting
integration, not only in the traditionally white schools, but in the
black schools. And we'll provide some funding to enable
minority teachers, or teachers at the minority schools, to get the
terminal degree." Or, "We will provide some funds to
improve, somewhat, the library facilities or resources at the poor
school. But we're not going any further than that.
We're not going to adopt what they call
'unreasonable goals' for minority enrollment or
the hiring of minority teachers. We're not going to make
A&T competitive with North Carolina State. We're
going to convert the system into research and doctoral institutions, and
masters institutions, and baccalaureate institutions. And the schools
will fall where they may in that." And the flagged institutions
like Chapel Hill, and State, and Greensboro, will remain flagged
institutions. Primarily research institutions of a higher salary base.
Really a higher funding base for those institutions. The five-year
institutions would include two, at least, of the traditionally black
institutions, but the funding for those programs, although facially
equal to the other five-year institutions, varied, because at East
Carolina you ended up with the doctoral programs at the medical school.
And there was, I think, a rather clear disparity in
the funding for those institutions, as compared to theߞand
even in the four-year institutions there were disparities between the
black and the traditional white institution. Facially though, was the
argument that we've gone A, B, C, or D, to bring in some
blacks and to make sure that a few blacks got to the traditional white
institutions, and that some whites got to the traditionally black
institutions. But there wasn't a commitment to bring the
black institutions up-to-par, even in the tiered structure that they
came up with to compete with the white institutions.
- WILLIAM LINK:
-
So that was built in the structure, in a sense, and went back, as you
suggested earlier, to theߞdo you think there was a line of
continuity between the rather open resistance to desegregation in the
1950s, even to token desegregation, from that point, to, among some
people, continued resistance in the seventies?
- JULIUS L. CHAMBERS:
-
Oh yeah, yeah. In fact I don't even think that North Carolina
would have moved any further in terms of bringing more minorities into
the university system but for the pressure, you see, from the Federal
government. One sees that even now, in terms of what the University has
done under this consent decree, which was finally
reached. Very limited goals for minority enrollment in the institutions.
Very limited goals for the employment of faculty members and
administrators. And basically nothing in terms of the enhancement of the
traditionally black institution. And very little was taking place. I was
pleased to see, when I was in Chapel Hill, I guess it was in May, that
the number of minority applicants has increased. But, I think the state
is doing a dismal job with the employment of faculty members and
administrators. And even with the enrollment of minority students.