Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1958-09-08

and strangled to death.
In a Nation that was built
and has thrived on the right
to differences, we are outlaw
ing such a democratic right
on the basis that it consti-
tutes an act Of prejudice and
segregation. All this in the
name Of equality and supreme
lawl Are We to believe the
summum bonum of life,
government and law is deSeg-
regation? Milan Dineen.
william s. White recently
compared the actions Of Gov.
FaubuS. in defying both the
Supreme Court decision and
that of the Federal court in
Little Rock. with the amend
ment Senator Paul Douglas
proposed to the numerous
anti-Supreme Court bills
before the Senate. Mr.. White
called Senator Douglas action
"the other side of the Faubus
eoin," and your headlines re-
ferred to IL Is the meeting Of
the extremes.
These statements show an
amazing lack Of understand
ing Of the anti-court bills and
the basic issues that were
; before the Senate in consider
ing these bills. The bills
themselves. of course, were
deliberately designed to pun
ish the court for its school
deSegregation decisions and
other decisions upholding
the constitutional rights Of
individuals of whatever race.
Senator Douglas sought to
counter the threat Of these
bills by proposing that the
Senate go on record in sup
port of the courts decisions.
But what has this to do with
the kind Of defiance of the
law Of the land by force and
violence which has been
preached by Gov. Faubus? To
characterize Senator Douglas
proposal as the other side
OF the Faubus CON-" as Mr..
White has done. is like trying
to blame the policeman,
whose duty 1t is to uphold
the law. for the acts Of the
lawbreaker in defiance of the
law.
Mr.. White has a curious
double standard: he criticized
Senator Douglas for offering
an amendment to support
the court and yet failed to
criticize those who offered
and pressed the bills to pun
ish' the court.
Senator Douglas stated on
the floor of the Senate:
Some have said :. it is
not a function Of Congress to
express either approval or
disapproVal of the decisions
OF the Supreme Court I ask
my colleagues, what have we
been doing all afternoon?
What has the Judiciary Com
mittee been doing by passing
on some of these questions?
The amendment which was
the So-called Jenner-Butler
bill was a thinly trans
parent effort to override no
less than flve Supreme Court
decisionS-Schware Koenigs-
berg, Watkins, Nelson, and
Yates. This is all a part of a
reverse the court campaign
which stems largely, al
though not entirely, from the
earlier decision of the Su-
preme Court in the Brown
case and cases which have
grown out Of the Brown case.
What our good friend is APP
parently contending is that
Congress has the right to
disapprove the decisions of
the court, but does not have
the right to declare its APP
proval Of the decisions of the
Supreme Court. My friend is
arguing that we must en-
bark on a one-way street;
that We should override the
court, but never support the
court"
Those who would support
the court and the law of the
land have been extremely
moderate in their views and
their actions when compared
with the actions Of the segre-
gationiSts. One need only
mention the Southern Man
ifeSto, the violence brought
forth by Gov. Faubus, the
bills passed by Southern leg
islatures. and the doctrine of
massive resistance.
The real purpose of the
anti-court bills before the
Senate was to punish the
court for its desegregation
decision.