Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-01-12
Virginia |nterposition Move
Jumps Gun on Leaders
Boutwright Bill
Seeks to NuIIify
RuciuI RULING
By a Star star Correspondent

the General Assembly today.
1t is known as "interposition."
1t assumes the right of States
to declare a Supreme Court de-
cree unconstitutional.
A maverick member Of the
Byrd Democratic organization
Jumped the gum" so to speak,
oy introducing interposition leg
islation on the opening day Of
the General Assembly yesterday.
He is Delegate John B. Boat
wright Of Buckingham.
Mr.. Boatwright is a die-hard
Democrat who, in years past, OPP
posed most vigorously Northern
Virginia's attempts to maintain
rent control during World War
II. He fought bitterly-and sue
cessfully-against law that
would have permitted Federal
employees to hold public Office in
Arlington county.
Decree Unconstitutional
His bill declares that the Su-
preme Courts school segregation
decree was IAN unlawful and un-
constitutional assumption of
power" 1t says Virginia's public
schools and "the very existence
of this Commonwealth are
threatened by the attempt Of the
Supreme Court to usurp power
which it does not have"
Mr.. Boatwright's move came as
a complete surprise.
The general impression was
that the move for interposition
would be made first by State
Senator Harry Stuart of Russell
County. Senator Stuart still
Iplans to introduce his version Of
Iinterposition. He told The Star
his resolution would be intro
Iduced to the Assembly sometime
next week.
Interposition is not widely
understood. Various attempts
have been made to define it.
i Has Long History
The doctrine of interposition is
STEPPED in tradition barking back
to the days of Jefferson and Mad
Iison. Modern critics say it is
Iarchaic.
The principle Of interposition
: now is being espoused principally
by Editor Jack Fitzpatrick of the
: Richmond News-Leader. Per-
haps it is best to explain the idea
. by using words that have been
| attributed directly to Mr.. Kill
patrick in the present contro-
versy. They are these:
:. 'Basically, the doctrine aims
at proposing a Constitutional
amendment prohibiting the
States from operating racially
separate facilities. If three
Ifourths of the States failed to
IIratify such an amendment,
Southern States would assert the
Supreme Court decision on seq
iregation was void.
Pending such settlement of
the issue, the interposing States
would declare that, as a matter
LOT right, they recognized no OBJ
LEGATION to comply with DEGREES
they regard as unconstitutional"
Offered as Bill
Mr.. Boatwright's legislation
was introduced in the form of a
bill. Senator Stuart proposes to
introduce a resolution.
| The difference is this: A bill
has mandatory powers of law. A
resolution has the effect of ex-
pressing a policy-a persuasive
policy normally.
Senator Stuart has not dis
CLOSED the details of his resolu-
ton of interposition.
Mr.. Boatwright's bill would
IN effect. make it mandatory for
IVlrglnia's public schools to con-
tinue operating on a segregated
basis.
The Boatwright bill SAYS:
The action of the Supreme
Court of the United States, in
holding that the States cannot
provide separate but equal ia
lcilities for children of different
races, constitutes an unlawful
and unconstitutional assumption
OF power which does not exist.
An agency created by a docu-
'ment to which sovereign States
were parties cannot lawfully
amend the creating document
when that document clearly spe-
fies in article v thereof the man
ner of amendment"
The Boatwright bill also would
place the general assembly on
record as declaring:
THE spirit impelllng the Su-
preme Court of the United
States to enlarge the powers of
the United States by forced
constructions of the Constitu-
ton of the United States poses
clear and present threat to
the several States and to their
citizens.
Excess of Tyranny"
Tyranny goes from one ex-
cess to even greater ones"
The Boatwright bill proposes
this legislative enactment by the
General Assembly:
Until such time as the Con-
stitution of the United States
may be amended in the manner
provided by that Constitution,
this Commonwealth is under no
obligation to accept supinely an
unlawful decree of the Supreme
Court of the United States based
upon an authority which is not
found in the Constitution of the
United States nor any amend
ment thereto.
Rather, this Commonwealth
Is in honor bound to act to ward
off the attempted exercise of
See ASSEMBLY, Page A-2e
b. =