Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 2—JANUARY 1961—5
■ ' ‘ " \
Some Sta
Georgia Solons
May Determine
To Wait and See
(Continued From Page 1)
Florida’s pupil placement law limited
to a single county, legislators looked
toward their April session with a tenta
tive “don’t-rock-the-boat” attitude.
However, some—particularly those from
the northern part of the state—appeared
to be less willing to “stand pat” with
placement as they reacted to continued
sit-in demonstrations by Negroes in the
cities.
Different Course
The Louisiana legislature, which re
enacted its two-year-old placement
law in 1960 with modifications, has
pursued a different course as place
ment provisions were followed in New
Orleans schools. The majority of the
assembly continues its pitched battle
against the court-ordered grade-a-year
plan for New Orleans embracing the
placement statute.
After producing a host of measures
in addition to pupil placement, seeking
to maintain completely segregated
school systems, only to have most of
them enjoined and then declared un
constitutional in federal district court,
Louisiana’s assembly began 1961 in the
midst of the third consecutive extraor
dinary session called by Gov. Jimmie
H. Davis.
The administration held to its pur
pose: to block desegregation. More and
more measures were enacted during
December. (See Louisiana.)
In Georgia, where the Atlanta school
system faces a court order to begin
desegregation next fall in grades 11 and
12, some officials and key legislators
indicated preference for a wait-and-see
policy during the regular session,
which starts this month. They spoke of
reconvening later in the year to take
up school desegregation issues after a
court decree is handed down in the
Atlanta case. In mid-December, how
ever, there were contrary indications.
Sentiment was voiced for legislative
action ahead of the court decree.
A Second Look
The court has deferred its decree to
give the legislators a chance for a sec
ond look at its stand on school closing
in the event of desegregation, along
with possible reconsideration of its
previous enactments on other related
issues. (See Georgia.)
In Alabama, where Gov. John Pat
terson last month promised an all-out
battle to prevent any school desegrega
tion, there nevertheless was little dis
cussion of new legislation. However,
Gov. Patterson was expected to renew
his request for authority to close
schools on his own motion.
Local boards in Alabama have
school-closing authority, and opponents
of conferring it upon the governor con
tend that such an action might render
the placement law and other school
segregation measures inoperative and
becloud their constitutionality. Gov.
Patterson sought the authority in 1959
but a measure to provide it died in a
Senate committee after passing in the
House of Representatives.
In Tennessee, one measure had been
suggested by an Eaststate senator in
late December for the General Assem
bly’s biennial session opening this
month. It is a proposal for a States
Rights Commission similar to the sov
ereignty commissions established in
five other states. Such a measure failed
in the 1959 legislature.
Groups of Slates Approve
Similar Legislation, Polieies
Many of the legislative actions of
1954-59 are identical or similar in
groups of states, having moved across
state lines in a sort of chain reaction.
Others have come about only in indi
vidual instances, to fit one-state pat
terns or limited policies.
Pupil assignment laws are an exam
ple of pattern legislation. Several other
types of measures exist in clusters of
states.
At least a half-dozen state legisla
tures have acted at various times to
protest officially the Supreme Court
decision, most of them during the three
years after it was handed down, and
some have called for major changes in
court jurisdiction and power.
Georgia legislators in 1955 began to
advocate an amendment to the U.S.
Constitution which would give indi
vidual states sole control over public
schools, and such an action still is pro
posed in Washington by Sen. Herman
Talmadge (D-Ga.). Another suggestion:
power
operations.
Ask Impeachment
That same year, Mississippi law
makers asked Congress to limit the
jurisdiction of the courts. In 1956,
Georgia called for impeachment of six
U. S. Supreme Court justices and
Florida solons condemned that tri
bunal’s “usurpation of powers.”
In 1957, Alabama legislators adopted
resolutions asking the Supreme Court
to modify its school desegregation de
cree; urged the court to reverse its
tendencies and “restore the rule of
law”; proposed limited terms for U. S.
judges and urged the President to re
spect states’ rights.
Also in 1957 came the “Tennessee
Manifesto,” a legislative document pro
testing what the General Assembly
called encroachments by the federal
government on rights reserved to the
states. Texas legislators urged that law
and order as well as school operations
be left exclusively to the states, and
that a set of qualifications be estab
lished for the federal judiciary. The
Texas Senate commended the Amer
ican Bar Association’s criticism of the
Supreme Court’s alleged tendencies to
ward federalism at the expense of the
states and toward going beyond strictly
legal intepretations of laws and the
Constitution.
Ratify Amendment
On the heels of the South’s barrage
of criticism, Maryland legislators in
1959 voted to ratify the 14th amend
ment to the Constitution—the basis for
the desegregation decisions, which some
Southern legalists have contended
never was constitutionally put into ef
fect because of its “reconstruction” as
pects after the Civil War.
Eight states, including the half-dozen
comprising the Deep South, have
moved toward application of the doc
trine of interposition—a historic con
cept of interposing state authority be
tween the people and the national gov-
Slapped Down Again
Dallas News
emment. An effort by the Louisiana
Legislature to apply interposition was
voided by a federal court in the New
Orleans school litigation in November.
In addition to Louisiana, states with
interposition resolutions on their legis
lative journals include Alabama, Ar
kansas, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi,
South Carolina and Virginia.
Arkansas voters not only amended
their constitution in 1956 to require
the Legislature to adopt a resolution
of interposition; they also spelled out a
declaration that the Supreme Court
desegregation ruling was void.
State Tuition Grants Gain
Over Private School Plans
Dozens of legislative actions have
dealt with proposed alternatives to bi-
racial schools or with actions designed
to pave the way toward those alterna
tives. Most of them either have speci
fied private schools in lieu of desegre
gated public schools, to be subsidized
with state funds, or have provided for
tuition grants from the state for pupils
individually to pay for their own edu
cations. A trend has been toward tui
tion grants because of court decisions
against public-subsidized private
schools. Various legal questions as to
tuition grants remain to be litigated
fully (Gene Wyatt’s article, SSN, De
cember).
Ten Southern states have enacted
laws dealing variously with the right
to close public schools in the face of
court orders to desegregate; five have
provided specifically for removal of
compulsory attendance laws and six
others either have modified attendance
laws or enacted other laws affecting
attendance requirements. Six states
have enacted tuition grant provisions,
although such a measure in Arkansas
was declared unconstitutional after
having been tied into a school-closing
law.
Alabama has removed from its con
stitution a.
segregation l
permitting (1)
close schools r -uren
to apply for t alloca
tion of edu -ids to areas
where public -*>1 funds are not
available because of desegregation; (3)
individual schools to secede from local
and state systems and organize their
own independent, autonomous districts.
Another Alabama statute, authorizing
separate schools for white or Negro
children whose parents “voluntarily
elect” them, remains untested although
a similar “parents’ preference” law in
Tennessee was declared unconstitu
tional on its face.
Permit School Closings
Arkansas enacted laws in 1958 not
only to permit school closing but to re
quire it in cases of orders to desegre
gate, with tuition grants for affected
pupils. Both laws were used by Gov.
Orval Faubus in the closing of Central
High School at Little Rock but both
were voided in the courts. However,
another law to authorize tuition grants
was enacted in 1958, not tied in with
school-closing features. Arkansas vot
ers recently turned down a proposed
constitutional amendment that would
have allowed a district to close all its
schools to avoid a court order for de
segregation.
A Florida statute enacted four years
ago gives the governor authority to
close any school where violence is
threatened because of court-ordered
desegregation. The state also has a pri
vate school corporation law. Gov. Le-
Roy Collins vetoed a measure that
would have permitted parents to close
any court-desegregated school by
means of an initiated referendum.
Georgia has supplemented its consti
tutional prohibition of racially mixed
schools with statutes to (1) forbid
state or local funds for schools ex
pected to desegregate; (2) authorize
the governor to suspend compulsory
attendance laws and to use extraordi
nary powers to suppress violence; and
(3) close a single school if it is deseg
regated. A majority of Georgians voted
in 1954 to permit the state to make
individual grants for education in order
to establish private schools in the event
of court-ordered desegregation. Since
then have come measures to (1) ex
tend teacher retirement benefits if they
are in nonpublic school status and
(2) allow leasing of public school
property for private schools. Later
measures would allow income tax
credits for private schools and would
assure teachers of their pay if public
schools are closed.
In Constant Session
Louisiana legislators, in almost con
stant session during recent weeks as
desegregation proceeded in New Or
leans, enacted a law in 1958 to au
thorize closing of desegregated schools
and to establish a program for financ
ing private schools with state grants.
Another act provided for paying teach
ers of closed schools. The school-clos
ing law was declared unconstitutional
by a federal court last August. Among
others thrown out were measures to
specify segregated schools under the
state’s police powers; to prohibit state
grants to desegregated schools; to au
thorize school-closing by the governor
and their sale to private interests. Not
yet used is a measure which would
provide grants-in-aid to nonsectarian
private schools. U. S. District Court at
New Orleans has enjoined and then in
validated a series of recent measures
proposing a number of closing plans
and setups for “private” education.
Mississippi, where efforts toward de
segregation have been fewer than in
any other state, recently ratified a
constitutional amendment to remove a
requirement that the legislature pro
vide public schools. Compulsory school
attendance has been off the statute
books since 1956. Local school trustees
are authorized to close public schools,
and the governor also has authority to
close public schools and colleges.
North Carolina by constitutional
amendment and by implementing laws
(1) permits voters of a local school
district to decide whether they prefer
school closings or desegregation; (2)
makes possible state tuition grants for
nonsectarian private school education
of children whose parents object to
their attending bi-racial schools.
Neither measure prohibits school de
segregation; they afford a choice for
each locality in the state.
Deletes Requirement
South Carolina’s Legislature in 1954
ratified a constitutional amendment,
approved by voters a year and a half
before, deleting a requirement that the
state provide “a liberal system of free
public schools.” Compulsory attendance
laws were repealed in 1955, although
“visiting” teachers were designated to
.;i*s Adamant
.^asion in advocating school at-
.uance. Sale or lease of public school
property is authorized. Another 1955
measure would deny public funds to
any school involved in a child’s trans
fer by court order, and from 1956 to
1960 state appropriations carried a
specification that funds should be “for
racially segregated schools only.” Leg
islators agreed to remove the specifica
tion in an effort to prevent desegrega
tion advocates from charging that it
would be futile to seek administrative
reassignment of pupils.
Texas enacted a law in 1957 to au
thorize closing of schools when troops
are sent there or violence is threat
ened.
Virginia’s “massive resistance” plan,
based on a “package” of laws declared
unconstitutional a year ago, included
automatic closing of desegregated
schools and provision of tuition grants
for children affected by such closings,
along with removal of compulsory at
tendance. The state’s present “freedom
of choice” plan allows local school sys
tems the option of abandoning public
schools, and localities may provide di
rect aid to private schools. Any child
not wanting to attend the public school
where he or she is assigned may get
a local-state tuition grant to attend
either a private nonsectarian school or
a public school in another community.
Stress Local Control
Tennessee, which has enacted rela
tively little legislation dealing with
segregation-desegregation and which
stresses local control of schools, passed
a single law on that subject in 1959,
making local school boards responsible
for enforcement of compulsory attend
ance. That law permits parents to with
draw their children from a school, with
the school board’s consent, “for any
good and substantial reason,” provided
the children are enrolled elsewhere
within 30 days.
Five states have established sover
eignty commissions—groups whose
purpose is to seek a reduction of fed
eral participation in state and local af
fairs. They are called specifically sov
ereignty commissions in Arkansas,
where the body has not functioned and
was crippled by a state court decision,
and in Louisiana and Mississippi.
Georgia and Virginia have commissions
on constitutional government. A simi
lar group proposed for Tennessee
would be called a States Rights Com
mission.
While sovereignty commissions are
set up to deal with various sorts of
federal-state issues, their creation has
come in the wake of the disputes over
federal judicial action on school poli
cies.
Seven States Move Against
Barratry, Racial Lobbying
At least seven Southern states have
moved in recent years against “barra
try” (solicitation of lawsuits), lobbying
on racial issues and activities of the
National Association for the Advance
ment of Colored People or groups ad
vocating desegregation.
Arkansas legislators have produced
a number of measures along these
lines. A law that would have required
teachers to list organizatons to which
they belong was declared unconstitu
tional last month. One 1959 statute
made it unlawful for NAACP members
to be employed by state or local gov
ernments or school districts. A series
of laws, drawn by State Attorney Gen
eral Bruce Bennett, dealt with such
things as membership lists of organi
zations and activities of non-Arkansas
corporations, including their tax pay
ments and so-called “practice of law.”
An ordinance reportedly enacted by 39
Arkansas cities, requiring names and
addresses of all members and contribu
tors to an organization, has been de
clared unconstitutional. Bennett stated
that this and similar measures were
for the purpose of keeping NAACP
busy defending itself.
Georgia recently stiffened its penalty
for barratry, and it is prohibited un
der laws enacted during the past five
years in Mississippi, South Carolina
and Virginia. Tennessee law calls for
information to be filed on those “so
liciting for litigation,” and registration
is specified for “racial” organizations,
although neither these nor several
other pro-segregation measures in that
state have been invoked. Mississippi
has a law requiring school personnel
to list memberships.
Investigate Corporations
South Carolina in 1958 authorized its
attorney general to investigate records
of foreign and domestic nonprofit cor
porations, in a move directed largely
at the NAACP. Earlier, the legislature
enacted a law requiring that appli
cants for public jobs list their mem
bership in various organizations. This
substituted for a court-challenged ;
forbidding public employment
NAACP members. Several coum,
have special laws which, if strictly e
forced, would require organizers to
tain local permits before solciting f^j
or members.
Texas in 1957 got a law alio*;
county judges to obtain members-
lists from organizations seeking to
fluence school operations. Virgin
1956 enactments included a requj
ment for registration of advocates
either segregation or desegregation, ^
that state’s anti-barratry measures;
extended to direct the state bar
punish persons found guilty of t
ethical or unauthorized law practice
Variety of Laws Passed
In Past Half-Dozen Years
Dozens of other laws passed in in
of the Southern and border states dir
ing the past half-dozen years &
scarcely be categorized. Here is a pj
tial summary of these miscellanea
measures, state by state:
Arkansas—Provision has been mj
for easier recall of school board me
bers on petition of 25 per cent of t
voters. School attendance figures r
previous years may be used in calc,
lating state aid for schools closed
cause of desegregation problems. Bit
for transfusions is to be labeled
race. Protection of retirement benef
is provided for public school teache
moved into private schools.
Florida—County school boards ha
been given authority to cancel ten®
of teachers on educational, sociologic
psychological or other ground. St
penalties are prescribed for convictk
of maliciously injuring buildings :
structures with gunpowder. Wearing
hoods or masks in public is prohibit?
Set Age Limit
Georgia — College undergrade
over the age of 21 and graduates on
25 are ineligible to enroll except
special cases. Retirement benefits ha
been extended to teachers transferrii
to nonpublic schools. Ad valorem tax;
for mixed schools are banned. Tre
passing on property of closed putt
schools is forbidden.
Mississippi—Speeches by advocak
of “antistate” action are banned at ste
institutions. Interracial marriages at
voided. Public disturbances and te!f
phone threats are banned.
Missouri—Pre-1954 segregation la*
were repealed after being declared ®i
enforceable by the state attorney g®
eral.
North Carolina—Teachers’ continue
contract law was repealed, make 1
teachers’ contracts subject to ann*
renewal. All references to race
eliminated from the general educate
law, and titles to school buses f®
transferred from the state to the co®
ties.
Oklahoma—A Constitutional am® 11
ment adopted in 1955 eliminated s®
arate school systems in effect by *
moving dual taxing and budget P r
visions and substituting a county" 1
tax levy for all schools. Legislation ®
acted that same year authorized sch®
on military reservations to conf° f
with federal requirements.
South Carolina—A 1957 law ve5 ^
the governor with enlarged author
in maintaining the public peace,
lation in 1959 made it a felony to be
any church, school, private reside 1 '
or other structure or to make thre®
or give false information about &
bombings.
Tennessee—A legislative “P aC ^
of 1957 included permission for se *
gation of the sexes in high schools-
Texas—A 1957 statute provides
local option elections on w hethe r
desegregate schools. (Five school
tricts have desegregated by
and several others, including ”
have voted against it. The state
torney general held that districts .
desegregate under court orders d ,
referendum disapproval may
their state school aid.) J
West Virginia—References to ,
Virginia College as a Negro ins^j,-
were eliminated, along with raci.
strictions for admission to the S ^
for the Deaf and Blind and all °
references in law to segregated ^ ■
tion. The former Negro Bur®®,
Welfare and Statistics was aboil 5 * 1 *
1958, leaving no special group i0
resent Negroes in the state
ment. #