Decision on the Oath

In a Sacramento courtroom last week, the two-year battle of the University of California loyalty oath came to its first legal decision. By unanimous vote, the three-man district court of appeals 1) declared the oath unconstitutional and 2) ordered the reinstatement of 26 professors who had been fired for not signing it.

Under California's constitution, said the court, all state employees (including faculty members of the university) are already required to swear allegiance to both state and nation. "We conclude that the people of California intended . . . that that pledge is the highest loyalty that can be demonstrated by any citizen, and that the exacting of any other test of loyalty would be anti-ethical to our fundamental concept of freedom."

However well-intentioned the regents might be in trying to protect the university from subversive influences, said the court, "we are also keenly aware that equal to the danger of subversion from without by means of force and violence is the danger of subversion from within by its gradual whittling away and the resulting disintegration of the very pillars of our freedom."

The effect of the decision, unless upset by appeal to a higher court, would reach far beyond the university campus. It would undoubtedly shake the validity of the recent California law requiring a special oath of every civil defense worker. It might also influence the courts in other states (e.g., Texas and Colorado) which had imposed similar loyalty oaths.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.