So if black students in the 60’s were able to sit at a lunch counter and be refused service, what is the legal difference between that and 16 year olds going to the mall and just sitting there? If it is trespassing (being young and in the mall on a Friday night), why wasn’t it trespassing when black students did in Woolworths? Because it seems to me that a private enterprise like the mall can refuse to sell to the kids (as if the mall itself actually sold anything), but that they cannot ban them.
Legally and historically, am I getting this wrong? I have gone back and looked at some of the Greensboro sit-in information, but there doesn’t seem to be any coverage on why they could not be removed. And if that is the case, how can the mall call the police and ask that one of these kids be removed, if they choose not to go? If North Carolina police couldn’t do it to black students in 1960, I’m not sure how this can fly.