Oath of loyalty to hitler1/21/2024 The Court declared that "the stifling effect on the academic mind from curtailing freedom of association in such a manner is manifest." In other words, the imposition of the loyalty oath, rather than narrowly targeting truly subversive activity which posed a threat to the U.S. In that landmark decision, the Court invalidated a state university's requirement, upon pain of dismissal, that each of its professors sign a certificate stating that he or she was not a Communist and would inform the university's president if he or she had at some previous time been a Communist. The Supreme Court indicated as much in Keyishian v. This incident is troubling in the first place because loyalty oaths have no rightful place on a university campus. It insisted that Gonaver sign the oath as it was written and, when she refused, summarily fired her. However, the university refused to allow her to do so, claiming that such an accomodation would be contrary to California law. Gonaver therefore agreed to sign the oath if she were permitted to attach a brief statement expressing her personal views on the matter and her belief in nonviolence. After all, a plain reading of it suggests that one is agreeing to take up arms against any "enemies" who present themselves. ![]() ![]() As a Quaker and lifelong pacifist, she objected to its violent overtones. Wendy Gonaver, who had recently been appointed to teach American studies at CSU-Fullerton, expressed her disagreement with this part of the oath. Last August, California State University-Fullerton fired a lecturer for refusing to sign a loyalty oath in which she would have pledged to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic."
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |