Expanded Timeline:
Events of the Loyalty Oath Controversy and Historical Background
September-October
1950
September 1
The District Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, issues an order to
show cause, staying the dismissal and requiring the Regents to legally
explain their action.
September 18
The Berkeley chapter of the American Association of University Professors
meets and adopts a resolution asking the national office to investigate
the University of California “with respect to faculty tenure and status."
An inquiry is started, but no formal action will be taken by
the AAUP until April 7, 1956, long after the UC controversy is resolved
in the courts.
September 21
Governor Warren calls for the Legislature to adopt a special loyalty oath
for every public employee in California. Despite his earlier opposition to the UC loyalty oath,
Warren is now engaged in a re-election campaign and in open controversy
with his fellow Republican, Lieutenant Governor Goodwin Knight, who has
supported the University’s oath as a member of the Board of Regents.
September 26
The Legislature adopts a state loyalty oath, which is signed by Governor
Warren on October 3, called the Levering Oath after Assemblyman Harold
Levering, its principal author.
It requires every public employee and civil defense worker
in California to swear that he or she does not advocate or is not
“a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that
now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States
or the State of California by force or violence.” and “I will not
advocate or become a member of any party or organization, political
or otherwise, that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the
United States or the State of California by force or violence or other
unlawful means.”
The State Senate also
votes to commend the Board of Regents for dismissing the non-signers of
the University’s oath.
By petition of several
faculty members, the Northern Section of the Academic Senate meets
the same day in Berkeley to consider a proposed motion to “censure”
the Regents. About 700
faculty attend. After
considerable debate and several motions, the Senate adopts a resolution
offered by UC Vice President and Provost Emeritus Monroe Deutsch thanking
those members of the Regents who had voted not to dismiss non-signers
and condemning the Board majority for its action that has “violated
the principle of tenure, an absolutely essential condition in a free
university.” The Senate also votes to ask its Committee on Privilege
and Tenure who reconsider its unfavorable recommendation to the Regents
on the five non-signers who had refused to say they were non-communists
or anti-communists. The motion passes, but is scheduled for reconsideration.
However, many faculty are angry at their colleagues for violations
of Senate procedure or for trying to prolong the controversy.
There is deep animosity between many members of the faculty,
particularly between some at Berkeley and some at other northern campuses.
October
9
The Northern Section of the Academic Senate meets again and requests
that its Committee on Privilege and Tenure further review the cases
of the five faculty so they might “be fully cleared of all imputation
of disloyalty and honorably restored to the enjoyment of their respective
positions.”
The Committee does
conduct a review and asks President Sproul to reinstate the five faculty.
October 13
The State Controller, charged with determining if UC employees are
subject to the Levering Oath, announces that they are and they must
sign "or go without pay.”
This is seen by many Regents as a threat to the constitutional
autonomy of the University.
The Board of Regents adopts a resolution which requests, but
does not require, UC employees to sign the Levering Oath.
October 27
The
Regents hold a special session on the Levering Oath, and hear that only 32
percent of UC employees have signed in the three days since the oath was
mailed to them. The Board
asks its attorney for advice.
Compiled by Steve Finacom |
