Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:02:01.921Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Best Defense Is a Good Offense: The Stennis Amendment and the Fracturing of Liberal School Desegregation Policy, 1964–1972

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2009

Joseph Crespino
Joseph Crespino
Affiliation:
Emory University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In December 1969, Governor John Bell Williams of Mississippi, one of the most notorious southern segregationists, proposed a $1 million program financed by the Mississippi state legislature to file school desegregation suits in northern states. “For fifteen years we have been on the defense,” Williams said. “Now we are going on the offense.” Williams's campaign was just one example of an odd but familiar trend that had emerged by 1970. Some of the most determined southern segregationists became enthusiastic supporters of northern school desegregation. In January 1970, the attorneys general in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Florida announced plans to intervene as friends of the court in a Pasadena, California, school desegregation case. In February 1970, the governor of Louisiana appealed to citizens of his state to fund a nationwide television campaign calling for equal treatment between northern and southern schools. Most important, that same month, U.S. Senator John C. Stennis of Mississippi carried the fight to the floor of the Senate. He introduced an amendment to a federal education bill that called for equal desegregation efforts in both the North and the South, regardless of whether the segregation resulted from state action or residential patterns. Stennis complained that the federal government was pursuing a regional desegregation plan. His ostensible goal was to bring about “one uniform policy” on school desegregation, “applicable nationwide.” But the real motivation, which almost every southern official conceded, was the hope that accelerated desegregation in the North would spark a broader, national backlash against school desegregation.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , July 2006 , pp. 304 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. New York Times, 14 December 1969, 40.

2. Los Angeles Times, 24 January 1970, 1A.

3. Washington Post, 13 February 1970, A10.

4. New York Times, 12 February 1970, 36.

5. Christian Science Monitor, 12 February 1970, 18.

6. The literature on the legal and political history of federal school desegregation policy is vast. For a good bibliographic overview, see Patterson, James, Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy (New York, 2001), 263–268Google Scholar. Works of particular importance for this investigation include Wilkinson, J. Harvie III, From Brown to Bakke: The Supreme Court and School Integration, 1954–1978 (New York, 1979)Google Scholar; Orfield, Gary, The Reconstruction of Southern Education: The Schools and the 1964 Civil Rights Act (New York, 1969)Google Scholar, and Public School Desegregation in the United States, 1968–1980 (Washington, D.C., 1983)Google Scholar; Graham, Hugh Davis, The Uncertain Triumph: Federal Education Policy in the Kennedy and Johnson Administration (Chapel Hill, 1984)Google Scholar, and The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy, 1960–1972 (New York, 1990)Google Scholar; Tushnet, Mark, Making Constitutional Law: Thurgood Marshall and the Supreme Court, 1961–1991 (New York, 1997)Google Scholar; Jeffries, John C. Jr., Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr.: A Biography (New York, 2001)Google Scholar; Greenberg, Jack, Crusaders in the Courts: How a Dedicated Band of Lawyers Fought for the Civil Rights Revolution (New York, 1994)Google Scholar; Bass, Jack, Unlikely Heroes (Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1981)Google Scholar; Metcalf, George R., From Little Rock to Boston: The History of School Desegregation (Westport, Conn., 1983)Google Scholar; Irons, Peter, Jim Crow's Children: The Broken Promise of the Brown Decision (New York, 2002)Google Scholar.

7. The most important works on massive resistance to school desegregation in the South end before the 1964 Civil Rights Act greatly expanded the role of the federal government in advocating school desegregation and before federal courts more clearly established the legal parameters. Bartley's, NumanThe Rise of Massive Resistance: Race and Politics in the South During the 1950s (Baton Rouge, 1969, 1999)Google Scholar; McMillen's, NeilThe Citizens' Council: Organized Resistance to the Second Reconstruction, 1954–1964 (Urbana, 1971, 1994)Google Scholar; Klarman, Michael, From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality (New York, 2004), 389–442Google Scholar. The best work on the opposition to busing has focused on Boston. See Lukas, J. Anthony, Common Ground: A Turbulent Decade in the Lives of Three American Families (New York, 1985)Google Scholar; Formisano, Ronald, Boston Against Busing: Race, Class, and Ethnicity in the 1960s and 1970s (Chapel Hill, 1991)Google Scholar.

8. Charles, W. and Whalen, Barbara, The Longest Debate: A Legislative History of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Washington, D.C., 1985), 33Google Scholar; Graham, The Civil Rights Era, 126–27.

9. Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, “The Civil Rights Bill of 1963: A Comparative Analysis of Three Versions of the Civil Rights Bill H.R. 7152,” folder H.R. 7152 (88) Civil Rights—Administration Omnibus, Drafts of Bill—Working Papers, folder 1, box 463, Emanuel Celler Papers, Library of Congress.

10. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Civil Rights: Report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights (Washington, D.C., 1963)Google ScholarPubMed.

11. Loevy, Robert D., To End All Segregation: The Politics of the Passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Lanham, Md., 1990), 19Google Scholar.

12. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Book 2: Education (Washington, D.C., 1961)Google ScholarPubMed.

13. Loevy, To End All Segregation, 46–49.

14. “History of Title IV,” folder Notebook, box 466, Emanuel Celler Papers, Library of Congress.

15. William M. McCulloch to Colleague, 6 November 1963, folder H.R. 7152 (88), Civil Rights—Administration Omnibus, Drafts of Bills—Working Papers, folder 2, box 463, Emanuel Celler Papers, Library of Congress.

16. Nicholas deB. Katzenbach to Emanuel Celler, 13 August 1963, folder H.R. 7152 (88) Civil Rights—Administration Omnibus, Working Papers, Notes for Floor Debate, folder 1, box 465, Emanuel Celler Papers, Library of Congress.

17. “History of Title IV,” folder Notebook, box 466, Emanuel Celler Papers, Library of Congress.

18. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Civil Rights' 63: 1963 Report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights (Washington, D.C., 1963), 55–56Google Scholar.

19. Loevy, To End All Segregation, 41–43.

20. Washington Post, 11 February 1964, A1, A5.

21. Bell v. School City of Gary, 324 F.2d 209 (1963); New York Times, 5 May 1964, 1.

22. See Dallek, Robert, Flawed Giant: Lyndon Johnson and His Times, 1961–1973 (New York, 1998), 221–226Google Scholar; Perlstein, Rick, Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus (New York, 2001), 317–321Google Scholar.

23. New York Times, 10 May 1964, E5.

24. Wall Street Journal, 9 April 1964, 4; Carter, Dan T., Politics of Rage (Baton Rouge, 1995), 195–225Google Scholar; Donaldson, Gary, Liberalism's Last Hurrah: The Presidential Campaign of 1964 (Armonk, N.Y., 2003)Google Scholar; Lesher, Stephan, George Wallace: American Populist (Reading, Mass., 1994)Google Scholar.

25. New York Times, 10 May 1964, E5.

26. Congressional Record, Senate, 4 June 1964, 12717.

27. New York Times, 30 October 1963, 1.

28. Congressional Record, Senate, 20 March 1964, 5795; Chicago Tribune, 21 March 1964, 7.

29. The Southern Civil Rights Litigation Papers at Tougaloo College, Jackson, Mississippi, record scores of examples of white intimidation against black parents who chose to send their children to white schools. For an account of the Carter family in Sunflower County, Mississippi and the harassment they received in their effort to exert their freedom-of-choice and send their children to the “white” school, see Curry, Constance, Silver Rights (Chapel Hill, 1995)Google Scholar. For a broader discussion of the ineffectiveness of freedom-of-choice plans as a desegregation tool, see Wilkinson, From Brown to Bakke, 108–15.

30. Stennis, John, “Floor Statement Re HEW Guidelines,” 20 02 1967, press release, John C. Stennis Papers, Mitchell Memorial Library, Mississippi State University, Starkville (hereafter JCSP)Google Scholar. The distinction that Brown did not require integration, that it merely forbid segregation, was initially authored by Judge John J. Parker of the Fourth District Court of Appeals in Briggs v. Elliot, 132 F. Supp. 776 (1955), a decision that J. Harvie Wilkinson described as one of the two most important decisions in defining school desegregation law from Brown II to Green v. County School Board. Wilkinson, From Brown to Bakke, 111.

31. Robert C. Byrd to President Lyndon Johnson, 10 March 1966, folder C-162D, box 4, series 29, JCSP.

32. Southern Senators to President Lyndon Johnson, 2 May 1966, folder c-162D, box 4, series 29, JCSP.

33. Southern Governors' Conference, Resolution Re Guidelines for Administration of Civil Rights Act, 21 September 1966, folder C-139A, box 4, series 29, JCSP.

34. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, “Revised Statement of Policies for School Desegregation Plans Under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” (Washington, D.C., 03 1966), 7Google Scholar.

35. Ibid., 7.

36. Green v. County School Board of New Kent County, 391 U.S. 430 (1968).

37. Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education, 396 U.S. 19 (1969); Chicago Tribune, 4 January 1970, 7.

38. See Kotlowski, Dean J., Nixon's Civil Rights: Politics, Principles, and Policy (Cambridge, Mass., 2001), 30–31Google Scholar.

39. Jackson (Miss.) Daily News, 4 August 1969.

40. “Research on Northern School Desegregation, 1970,” folder C-119, box 3, Series 29, JCSP.

41. W. E. Cresswell to John Stennis, 22 October 1969, folder C-115, box 3, series 29, JCSP.

42. New York Times, 15 October 1969, 20.

43. Washington Post, 25 November 1969, A1.

44. In an oval office meeting on 7 February 1970, Nixon told aides it would be a “disaster” to sue northern school districts with de facto patterns of segregation. John Ehrlichman, Oval Office Notes, 7 February 1970, folder Notes 2/7/70, box 1, Ehrlichman Papers, Hoover Archives, Stanford University.

45. Congressional Record (hereinafter CR), Senate, November 25, 1969, 35820–35 and 35738–58; Washington Post, 26 November 1969, A2; CR, Senate, 91st Cong., 1st sess., vol. 115, part 27, 1 December 1969, 36266–67; Washington Post, 30 November 1969, 1; CR, Senate, 91st Cong., 1st sess., vol. 115, part 27, 2 December 1969, 36387–401; CR, Senate, 91st Cong., 1st sess., vol. 115, part 27, 6 December 1969, 37529–57, and CR, Senate, 91st Cong., 1st sess., vol. 115, part 28, 9 December 1969, 37859–82; New York Times, 9 December 1969, 37; CR, Senate, 91st Cong., 1st sess., vol. 115, part 28, 11 December 1969, 38427–54.

46. New York Times, 10 February 1970, 29. For the full text of the speech, see “Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1969 to HR 514, Stennis Amendmts. nos. 463 and 481, box 121, Abraham Ribicoff Papers, Library of Congress. For a fuller articulation of Ribicoff's position, see Ribicoff, Abraham, America Can Make It! (New York, 1972), 14–48Google Scholar, and Ribicoff, , “The Future of School Integration in the United States,” Journal of Law and Education 1, no. 1 (01 1972): 1–21Google Scholar.

47. Christian Science Monitor, 24 February 1970, 2.

48. Washington Post, 15 February 1970, 49.

49. Christian Science Monitor, 3 March 1970, 1; Newsweek, 23 February 1970, 22–23. Also see folder “Univ. of Pennsylvania,” 2 March 1970, box 121, Abraham Ribicoff Papers, Library of Congress.

50. Washington Post, 15 February 1970, 49.

51. Time, 23 February 1970, 14–17. For examples of the widespread newspaper and editorial reaction to Ribicoff's speech, see folders 1–5, box 575, Abraham Ribicoff Papers, Library of Congress.

52. Quoted in CR, Senate, 91st Cong., 2d sess., vol. 116, part 8, 1 April 1970, 10012–19.

53. Washington Post, 13 February 1970, A18.

54. New York Times, 12 February 1970, 36.

55. CR, Senate, 1 April 1970, 10012–19.

56. Washington Post, 22 February 1970, 54.

57. New York Times, 12 February 1970, 1; For a record of these hearings, see Equal Educational Opportunity, Hearings Before the Select Committee on Equal Educational Opportunity of the United States Senate, 91st Cong., 2d sess., Part 3A-3E (Washington, D.C., 1970) (hereafter Equal Educational Opportunity Hearings). For Ribicoff's observations, see Ribicoff, America Can Make It! 27

58. Christian Science Monitor, 4 March 1970, 1.

59. Transcript, “Meet the Press,” 1 March 1970, folder Education (school segregation), box 121, Abraham Ribicoff Papers, Library of Congress.

60. Washington Post, 15 February 1970, 49.

61. New York Times, 24 February 1970, 42.

62. Bickel, , “Desegregation: Where Do We Go from Here?” New Republic, 7 02 1970, 21 (hereafter Bickel, “Desegregation”)Google Scholar.

63. For a fuller articulation of Bickel's position, see Bickel, , The Supreme Court and the Idea of Progress (New York, 1970)Google Scholar, a compilation of the Oliver Wendell Holmes lectures that Bickel delivered at Harvard Law School in October 1969. For more on Bickel's liberal credentials, see Kluger, Simple Justice, 614–16, and CL, 28 August 1968, 1.

64. Bickel, “Desegregation,” 21.

65. Ibid., 22.

66. Ibid.

67. Equal Education Opportunity Hearings, part 3E, 1970, 2332–53. Critics of Bickel included Tyack, David, Orfield, Gary, Brest, Paul, Trister, Michael B. and Spriggs, P. Kent, Panetta, Leon, and Edelman, Marian Wright. Equal Educational Opportunity Hearings, part 3E, 1970, 2338–2339Google Scholar.

68. Equal Educational Opportunity Hearings, part 3E, 1970, 2339; For more of the reaction by liberal integrationists in the South, see New York Times, 15 February 1970, 25, and an article by Pat Watters of the Southern Regional Council, New York Times, 3 May 1970, 26–27, 104–8; New York Times, 15 March 1970, 1.

69. Equal Educational Opportunity Hearings, part 3E, 1970, 2351.

70. Ibid., 2349.

71. Ibid., 2217; for more on the Preyer-Spong legislation and Bickel's comments and criticism, see Equal Educational Opportunity Hearings, 2207–47. Also see Washington Post, 1 March 1970, 79.

72. For the larger literature on Nixon and school desegregation, see Hoff, Joan, Nixon Reconsidered (New York, 1994)Google Scholar; Small, Melvin, The Presidency of Richard Nixon (Lawrence, Kan., 1999)Google Scholar; Wicker, Tom, One of Us: Richard Nixon and the American Dream (New York, 1991)Google Scholar; Kotlowski, Nixon's Civil Rights, 15–43; Graham, Civil Rights Era, 301–65; Carter, Politics of Rage, 324–414.

73. Christian Science Monitor, 16 February 1970, C3.

74. New York Times, 13 February 1970, 1.

75. Washington Post, 14 February 1970, A1.

76. New York Times, 26 February 1970, 22.

77. New York Times, 18 February 1970, 1.

78. Ibid.

79. Quoted in New York Times, 19 February 1970, 1; also see New York Times, 1 March 1970, 50.

80. See New York Times, 25 March 1970, 26, for the full text of Nixon's statement.

81. Carter, Politics of Rage, 380–81; Ehrlichman, John, Witness to Power (New York, 1982), 230Google Scholar.

82. New York Times, 25 March 1970, 1, and 26 March 1970, 46; Washington Post, 26 March 1970, A16.

83. Washington Post, 12 April 1970, 1.

84. New York Times, 19 February 1970, 36.

85. New York Times, 20 March 1970, 1; Wall Street Journal, 25 March 1970, 2;

86. CR, Senate, 91st Cong., 2d sess., vol. 116, part 8, 1 April 1970, 10015.

87. John Stennis, “Desegregation,” 12 October 1970, press releases, JCSP.

88. Stennis, John, “Press release—Desegregation,” 12 10 1970, press releases, JCSPGoogle Scholar; John Stennis, “Floor statement—Segregation,” 14 October 1970, press release, JSCP.

89. Washington Post, 31 January 1971, 39.

90. Stennis, John C., “School Desegregation,” 19 04 1971, press release, JCSPGoogle Scholar; CQA, 1971, 606; Washington Post, 23 April 1971, A9.

91. Folder “Integration—Senate Speech Re S. 1557,” box 127, Abraham Ribicoff Papers, Library of Congress.

92. Washington Post, 27 April 1971, A17.

93. New York Times, 21 March 1971, E11; see also New York Times, 18 April 1971, E13.

94. Quoted in Washington Post, 20 April 1971, A2.

95. New York Times, 23 April 1971, 1.

96. Ibid., 1; Newsweek, 3 May 1971, 27.

97. Washington Post, 22 April 1971, 1.

98. CQA, 1971, 605.

99. Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1; 91 S.CT. 1267; 28 L. Ed. 2d 554 (1971)

100. New York Times, 21 April 1971, 29.

101. Ibid., 1, 28; New York Times, 23 April 1971, 1.

102. Washington Post, 24 October 1971, 1; New York Times, 14 November 1971, E2.

103. Washington Post, 24 October 1971, 1; also see Washington Post, 14 November 1971, 38.

104. New York Times, 14 November 1971, E2.

105. Christian Science Monitor, 31 May 1973, 1.

106. McMillen, Neil, “Development of Civil Rights 1956–1970,” in McLemore, , ed., A History of Mississippi, vol. 2 (Hattiesburg, Miss.), 175Google Scholar.