Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-01-21
eoii6|5foI QKg 4G]gg
|nterposition Motion
Questions Rise
On Intent Of
Resolution
BY MARY LOU WERNER
star stan Correspondents

BY MARY LOU WERNER
star stan Correspondents
RICHMOND. Jan. 21.-Vir-
ginia legislators took q second
look at the Stuart interposition
resolution during the weekend
General Assembly recess, as they
pondered some pithy questions
raised by Delegate Robert White
head of Nelson County,
In effect, the questions asked
whether the resolution is merely
Ia mild rebuke to the Supreme
Court segregation decision or
Ian outright threat Of nullifca-
ton.
Delegate Whitehead. leading
anti-organization Democrat In
the House. directed his questions
to Senator Harry Stuart Of Rus
sell County. patron Of the new
linterposition resolution intro
duced in the Senate on Thurs
day.
Thirty-four other Senator's
out of the total Senate member
ship of 40 signed the Stuart
resolution as co-sponsors. Some
seemed to regard it as aiwatered-
down version Of earlier interpo-
sition moves. They noted that
all direct statements of nullifi-
cation were trimmed out Of the
Stuart resolution. Other Sem
ators, however, seemed to agree
with Senator Stuart that the
surgery didn't remove any
teeth" from the interposition
move.
To Answer Later
Senator Stuart, obviously irri-
ltated at the blunt queries, had
no comment right away. He
promised to answer Mr.. White
head sometime next week.
Mr.. Whitehead had no direct
comments of his own on the
Stuart resolution, but the tone
of his questions made it, clear
| he considered the measure much
more than a strong protest"
| as some lawmakers have de-
scribed it. MIR. Whitehead said
! he would make his views on the
Stuart resolution known after
his questions are answered.
Here is a summary Of some OF
the questions raised by Mr..
Whitehead:
81. Does your resolution
recognize the jurisdiction and
power of the tSupreme) Court
to render a decision In those
(segregation) cases?"
"2. Is that decision ION segre-
gation) now the law of the land
and is it now law in Virginia?
If not. why?"
"3. If your resolution is
adopted. will the said decision
be the law of the land and will
/ it be binding on the Federal
courts in virginia."
a. If your resolution is
adopted. will it have the effect
Of legally suspending the en-
iorcement Of the decision in
Virginia? If so. why. and for
what period?"
IS. Do you concede or deny
that a decision of the Supreme
Court Of the United States con-
STRUNG the Constitution Of the
United States is the law Of the
land and binding in every State
In the Union unless and until
there is an amendment to the
Constitution approved by three
fourths of the States overriding
the decision?"
+ Question on Notification
Is If your resolution is
adopted, do you maintain that
the decision of the court can
be permanently overridden or
vetoed by the action Of one
fourth of the States? If so. ID
this not :. nullification?"
~. Would the adoption of your
resolution challenge and impair
the settled doctrine of judicial
review by the Federal Courts of
State law?"
The Stuart resolution is in the
Senate Committee on Court Of
Justice. 1t is scheduled to be
reported to the floor Of the SEN
ate next week for debate and
action. If passed. it will go to
the House.
Besides the queries Of Mr..
Whitehead, there were other in
dications that the Stuart resolu-
ton is headed for some strong
debate.
| One of the five Senators who
did not sign the resolution indi-
Gated he would try to tack on an
amendment stating that it was
not notification.
Wait-and-See Movement
Two members OF the House
said there was q strong wait
and see" sentiment in that
chamber. Delegate John Mac
Kenzie of Portsmouth said he
objected to the interposition
resolution becauseThe thought it
looked as II the General Assem-
bly, was trying to run in two
directions at once" He was re-
Herring to pending action on the
Gray Commission plan to avoid
enforced indignation in public
schools. The interposition resolu-
ton would seem to hold the Gray
plan in allegiance. said Mr.. Mac
Kenzie.
Delegate Kossen Gregory OF
Roanoke questioned whether the
interposition move was worth
while or Just an idle gesture"
The title of the Stuart resolu-
ton reads: "Interposing the
sovereignty Of Virginia against
Iencroachme1t unon the reserved