Nomination of James P. Coleman: Hearing, 89-1, July 12-13m 1965
1965 - 164 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
action amendment American appointment approve Attorney Attorney General KATZENBACH authority believe called Chairman Chief citizens civil rights committee confirmed Congress Constitution CONYERS course Court of Appeals decision desegregation district Eastland Education effect elected enforcement equal fact Federal courts feel Fifth Circuit Fifth Circuit Court follow give Governor Coleman hear held House integration interposition involved issue James judge judicial Judiciary June Justice lawyer legislation Legislature live Louisiana matter means ment Miss Mississippi Negro never nomination opinion Orleans passed political position practice present President public schools question race racial reason record referred Representatives resolution respect responsibility rules School Board segregation segregationist Senator ERVIN Senator JAVITS Senator KENNEDY signed South stand statement statute subcommittee Supreme Court Thank thing tion United vote Washington
Page 66 - That this assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare that it views the powers of the Federal Government as resulting from the compact to which the States are parties...
Page 65 - That the several States composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that by compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States...
Page 70 - ... the General Assembly doth solemnly appeal to the like dispositions in the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid are unconstitutional ; — and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each for co-operating with this state, in maintaining unimpaired the authorities, rights, and liberties, reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Page 66 - Government is the exclusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it, stop nothing [short] of despotism — since the discretion of those who administer the government, and not the Constitution, would be the measure of their powers: That the several states who formed that instrument being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of the infraction; and, That a Nullification by those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts done under color of that instrument is the...
Page 66 - Government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that as in all other cases of compact among parties having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions, as of the mode and measure of redress.
Page 68 - State, sometimes termed its police power, to prescribe regulations to promote the health, peace, morals, education and good order of the people, and to legislate so as to increase the industries of the State, develop its resources, and add to its wealth and prosperity.
Page 49 - Article VI of the Constitution makes the Constitution the "supreme Law of the Land." In 1803, Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for a unanimous Court, referring to the Constitution as "the fundamental and paramount law of the nation," declared in the notable case of Marbury v.
Page 64 - When a State exercises power wholly within the domain of state interest, it is insulated from federal judicial review. But such insulation is not carried over when state power is used as an instrument for circumventing a federally protected right.
Page 62 - ... the usual and most effectual precautions are taken to secure this impartiality. Some such tribunal is clearly essential to prevent an appeal to the sword and a dissolution of the compact; and that it ought to be established under the general rather than under the local governments, or, to speak more properly, that it could be safely established under the first alone, is a position not likely to be combated.
Page 50 - Brown was unanimously reached by this Court only after the case had been briefed and twice argued and the issues had been given the most serious consideration. Since the first Brown opinion three new Justices have come to the Court. They are at one with the Justices still on the Court who participated in that basic decision as to its correctness, and that decision is now unanimously reaffirmed. The principles announced in that decision and the obedience of the States to them, according to the command...