◆ SpookStack

I. JURISDICTION Interference with Civil Rights activity of any type, and especially in that area defined in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (CRA, 1964), would be a possible area wherein the Department could seek injunctive relief against interference with Civil Rights workers. Particular attention is pointed to the fair employment practices section of the CRA, 1964, public accommodations and school integration areas, voter registration and any other zone of activity wherein an organized effort is made to interfere with the Civil Rights ‘program aimed at establishing equality of races. . 1. Utilization of fair employment practices section of the CRA, 1964, : a In the Bogalusa situation, Negroes were picketing busin« establishments claiming that they were not afforded fair employ- ment opportunities by the picketed establishments. Police failed to adequately control the street activity while picketing was in progress and pickets were repeatedlysassaulted by Klansmen and - others in the city streets. On the theory that the establish- ments being picketed were required under Section 7, CRA, 1964, to meet the terms of this act, -the Department ruled that inter- ference with picketing seeking the opportunities permitted in the statute was in violation of the Act; hence, interference with pickets was an overt act in conflict with the provisions of CRA, 1964, To show that a business establishment was covered by the Act, it was necessary to prove that it dealt in interstate commerce and employed over 100 people, The concept of total number of employees encompassed in the Department's theory was all employees of the parent organization. The Department indicate too, that franchise-type businesses might fall in the same categor as direct subsidiaries; therefore, proof was ssked as to the applicability of CRA, 1964 to such businesses as Western Auto stores, Walgreen and Rexall outiets and similar licensed private businesses.