Edwin Washington Project

Gray Commission

Item Set

Items

• EWP 1-4-3 Yr 1955 12-13 Mecklenburg COunty supports Gray Commission
• EWP 1-4-3 Yr 1955 11-24 Phillips Favors Gray Commission
• EWP 1-4-2 Yr 1955 Undated Legislation Proposed by Gray Commission
• EWP 1-4-2 Yr 1955 12-11 Qs and As on Gray Commission
• EWP 1-4-2 Yr 1955 11-11 Gray Commission Report
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 006
  Page 6 of the Gray Commission Report criticizes the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision for overturning long-standing legal precedents on segregation, arguing that it relied on psychological studies and sociological research rather than established law. The Commission expresses deep concern that the ruling undermines constitutional stability by allowing the Court to change interpretations at will, rather than following formal amendment processes. The report also highlights Virginia’s efforts to improve public education, emphasizing the financial investment in segregated schools and the progress made in increasing enrollment and teacher salaries for Black students.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 005
  Page 5 of the Gray Commission Report outlines the historical legal foundation for school segregation before the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education. It explains that segregation was previously upheld under state police powers, citing Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Gong Lum v. Rice (1927) as precedents that validated racial separation in public schools. The report argues that at the time of the Fourteenth Amendment’s adoption, lawmakers did not anticipate it applying to school segregation, reinforcing the perspective that the Brown ruling marked a major legal shift.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 020
  Page 20 of the Gray Commission Report continuation of Appendix III details the voting procedures for the proposed constitutional convention, specifying that the electorate will only grant the convention authority to amend the Virginia Constitution regarding education funding for private schools. The section explains the ballot format, voting process, and responsibilities of election officials, including certifying results, reporting to the Governor, and publicizing the outcome. Additionally, it outlines State Board of Elections duties, funding for election expenses, and the immediate enactment of the Act due to its classification as an emergency measure.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 019
  Page 19 of the Gray Commission Report continuation of Appendix III outlines the limited powers of the proposed constitutional convention, emphasizing that it may only amend the Virginia Constitution to allow public funds to be used for private, nonsectarian schools. It states that the convention would have the authority to proclaim and enact these amendments without requiring voter approval, ensuring a streamlined process. The document also details the procedures for conducting the statewide election on whether to call the convention, including ballot formatting, election logistics, and ensuring that voters understand the convention’s narrow scope.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 018
  Page 18 of the Gray Commission Report Appendix III introduces a proposed bill to hold a public referendum on whether to convene a constitutional convention to amend specific provisions of the Virginia Constitution related to education funding. The bill argues that a convention is necessary to revise constitutional restrictions that currently prevent public funds from being used for private school tuition, particularly affecting war orphans, handicapped students, Negro graduate students, and future teachers and nurses. To avoid broader constitutional debates and ensure swift approval, the bill limits the convention’s authority to only those amendments necessary for implementing educational aid programs and maintaining segregated schooling.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 017
  Page 17 of the Gray Commission Report continuation of Appendix II recommends that Virginia’s schools continue operating under segregation for the 1955-1956 school year, as the Commission deems an immediate transition to a non-segregated system impractical. It argues that administrative and logistical challenges make integration unfeasible and advises the governor and the State Board of Education to maintain the current segregated structure. The Commission commits to further study and plans to submit a future report with specific legislative proposals but advises against calling a special session of the General Assembly at this time.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 016
  Page 16 of the Gray Commission Report Appendix II details the Commission’s continued efforts to develop a legal strategy to prevent enforced school integration following the Supreme Court’s ruling on May 31, 1955. It highlights that the Commission, in consultation with legal experts and state officials, has studied various legislative options but acknowledges that significant statutory changes are required, affecting school governance, funding, teacher employment, and local policies. The report stresses the need for careful and deliberate action, warning that hasty decisions could severely damage Virginia’s public school system, and emphasizes that addressing these issues requires extensive legislative planning and constitutional considerations.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 015
  Page 15 The Gray Commission Report continuation of Appendix I reinforces the Commission's assertion that a significant majority of Virginians oppose school integration, as evidenced by petitions, communications, and resolutions from local government bodies and organizations. It argues that integrating schools against public sentiment would destabilize or severely harm the public school system, particularly since local funding plays a major role in education in Virginia. The Commission concludes by committing to developing a legally viable strategy to prevent enforced integration while maintaining control over the state's education system.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 014
  Page 14 of the Gray Commission Report Appendix I provides background on the Commission’s formation, public engagement, and findings regarding opinions on school integration in Virginia. It describes how the Commission, appointed by Governor Thomas B. Stanley, received extensive feedback through mail, conversations, and a large public hearing held in Richmond, where the majority of attendees opposed integration. The report highlights widespread resistance from counties, school boards, and organizations, with some groups stating they would rather see public schools abolished than integrated, reinforcing the Commission’s stance against enforced desegregation.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 013
  Page 13 of the Gray Commission Report serves as an acknowledgment section, expressing gratitude to various individuals who contributed to the Commission’s work. It specifically recognizes key figures in Virginia’s education system, legal counsel, and administrative staff for their assistance in developing the proposals outlined in the report. The Commission emphasizes that all suggestions and input were carefully considered in shaping its recommendations. It provides the list of all Gray Commission Members who submitted the report.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 012
  Page 12 of the Gray Commission Report emphasizes granting local school boards the option, but not the obligation, to maintain schools for at least nine months, while clarifying legal procedures for school funding, appeals, and assignments. It calls for repealing outdated or contradictory laws, including those mandating segregated schools, and stresses that all proposed legislative measures must be considered together to effectively prevent enforced integration. The report concludes by urging the governor to call a special legislative session focused solely on amending Section 141 of the Virginia Constitution, which is deemed necessary to continue segregationist education policies.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 011
  Page 11 of the Gray Commission Report outlines additional measures to support the tuition grant program and resist enforced integration, including state funding for half of the excess costs incurred by localities. It proposes giving local school boards greater financial flexibility to allocate funds for tuition grants, authorizing the employment of legal counsel to defend board members, and expanding the Virginia Supplemental Retirement Act to cover private school teachers affected by segregation policies. The report also recommends granting the Attorney General authority to assist local school boards with legal matters related to segregation, as well as amending various sections of the state code to accommodate the proposed changes.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 010
  Page 10 of the Gray Commission Report outlines a plan to fund tuition grants and transportation costs for families who refuse to send their children to integrated schools, ensuring that local school boards have discretion over these expenditures. It proposes that state and local funds be allocated for tuition grants, with legal penalties for misuse, and that school budgets be required to include sufficient funds for such payments. Additionally, the report recommends that the state reimburse localities for half of the additional costs incurred from these tuition grants, further reinforcing the effort to resist enforced integration.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 009
  Page 9 of the Gray Commission Report outlines the proposed process for student assignments, emphasizing that decisions should be based on factors such as school facilities, student welfare, and transportation availability, while ensuring that no child is forced to attend an integrated school. It establishes a formal appeal process for parents who object to school assignments, allowing for hearings at the local level and further appeals to higher courts. Additionally, the report recommends clarifying school transportation policies, reinforcing local control over teacher assignments, and permitting localities to raise and allocate funds for education, including transportation costs, while maintaining the option for funding alternatives in areas without public schools.
• EWP Gray Commission Image Page 008
  Page 8 of the Gray Commission Report emphasizes the need for Virginia’s citizens to respond to the challenge of school integration with the same spirit as the state’s historical leaders. The Commission proposes legislation allowing local school boards to assign students in a way that maintains segregation and offers tuition grants to families who refuse to send their children to integrated schools. It also recommends amending §141 of the Virginia Constitution to permit public funds to be used for private school tuition, arguing that failure to do so would jeopardize other state education programs, including scholarships and aid for specialized student groups.
• EWP Gray Commission Image page 007
  Page 7 of the Gray Commission Report argues that segregation has been beneficial to both races and claims that public education for Black students has improved because of it. The Commission asserts that forced integration could lead to the closure of public schools in many Virginia communities, particularly where white residents would rather abandon the system than comply. It emphasizes local control over school policies, suggesting that decisions on teacher employment, student assignments, and school operations should be left to local authorities to address racial tensions in their own communities.
• EWP Gray Commission Image page 5
  Introduction to the Gray Commission Report on Public Education and its purpose: to examine the effect of the Supreme Court Decision of May 17, 1954, Brown v . Board of Education Topeka Kansas, with emphasis on the Virginia case of Davis v County School Board of Prince Edward County and the decision's consequential impact on education in Virginia at the time.
• EWP Gray Commission 002 Image of List of Members of the Commission, Counsel, and Staff Page
  Members of the Commission, Counsel, and Staff Page. There are 32 commission members, plus two Counsel and three staff members.
• EWP Gray Commission 001 Cover
  Title Page of the Gray Commission Report Senate Document No. 1 printed for the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1955
• EWP 001 Yr 1955 Gray Commission Booklet
  Report to the Governor of Virginia from the Gray Commission regarding the ramifications of the Davis V. School Board of Prince Edward County Virginia Supreme Court Decision in 1954.
• EWP 1-4-4 Yr U Notes on Gray Commission, Supreme Crt and Amendment