Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 2 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
COURT DECISION MARKS BREAK WITH TRADITION
When the Supreme Court announced its decision last week, holding that racial segregation in public schools is unconstitutional, it overruled and repudiated five former decisions of the same court, at least thirteen decisions of lower Federal courts and at least 59 decisions of State courts.
And, as was forcefully pointed out in the brief filed with the Supreme Court last year by Attorney General Lindsay Almond of Virginia, this interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment is contrary to the understanding of the Congress which adopted the amendment and of the States when it was ratified. The Virginia brief, in preparation of which our Attorney General had the assistance of some of the State’s most distinguished constitutional lawvers, cited the record to show affirmative evidence that 23 States understood that the Fourteenth Amendment would NOT abolisFT segregated schools. In the case of the other fourteen states no evidence was found one way or the other, but there was no positive evidence that any of the 37 States which composed the Union when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified understood that it would prohibit segregated schools. It 'ferns cletir, therefore, that the Court in this instance has thrown overboard the common law principle of “stare decisis”—which means standing by decisions of the past—and has substituted a psychological test for rules of law.
69.9%