The Surprisingly Contentious History of Executive Orders | Huffpost  

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Surprisingly Contentious History of Executive Orders | Huffpost   4/2/2020 The Surprisingly Contentious History Of Executive Orders | HuffPost Ben Feuer, Contributor Chairman, California Appellate Law Group The Surprisingly Contentious History Of Executive Orders Cries of “unprecedented” executive action on both sides are more histrionic than historical. 02/02/2017 04:59 am ET | Updated Feb 03, 2017 Despite howls that Presidents Trump and Obama both issued “unprecedented” executive orders, presidents have embraced executive actions to enact controversial policies since the dawn of the Republic. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-surprisingly-contentious-history-of-executive-orders_b_58914580e4b04c35d583546e 1/8 4/2/2020 The Surprisingly Contentious History Of Executive Orders | HuffPost NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/GETTY IMAGES Recently, USA Today savaged President Trump’s executive orders since taking office, from encouraging Keystone XL approval to altering immigration policy, as an “unprecedented blizzard.” In 2014, the Washington Post raked President Obama for his Deferred Action immigration directives, more commonly called DACA and DAPA, deeming them “unprecedented” and “sweeping,” while Ted Cruz published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal lashing Obama’s “imperial” executive order hiking the minimum wage for federal contractors as one with “no precedent.” A 2009 piece in Mother Jones lamented a President George W. Bush executive order allowing former-presidents and their families to block the release of presidential records as — you guessed it — “unprecedented.” With all the talk of precedent, you might think executive orders historically did little more than set the White House lawn watering schedule. But the reality is that presidents have long employed executive actions to accomplish strikingly controversial objectives without congressional approval. Their efforts have met with varying degrees of success — both in courts of law and in the court of history. Prose By Any Other Name At the outset, the terminology is important. Several different documents are forms of “executive action” by which the president instructs his subordinates in the executive branch how their boss wants them to enforce the law. The most prominent are “executive orders.” Trump’s order restricting immigration was an executive order. Executive orders are the most formal. They have been numbered since 1907, and a law enacted in the 1930s required most (but not all) to be published in the Federal Register. A JFK-era executive order requires later executive orders to cite legal authority. “Presidential memoranda,” once called presidential letters, are less formal but still direct agency action just as forcefully as executive orders. In effect, they’re basically the same, but presidential memoranda need not include any of the numbering, authority or even publication features of executive orders (though the Trump and Obama administrations have published many of theirs on the White House website and some in the Federal Register). The Trump administration has begun issuing a new flavor of presidential memoranda called “Presidential National Security Memoranda”; the reorganization of the National Security https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-surprisingly-contentious-history-of-executive-orders_b_58914580e4b04c35d583546e 2/8 4/2/2020 The Surprisingly Contentious History Of Executive Orders | HuffPost Council to elevate Steve Bannon and demote military and intelligence officers came in one of these memos. “Presidential proclamations,” such as Trump’s presidential proclamation declaring his Inauguration Day a “National Day of Patriotic Devotion,” are the least formal and have no mandatory authority within the executive branch. They may be published in the Federal Register, and are generally well respected by executive appointees. They typically include such proclamations as flying flags at half-mast or creating a new national monument. Executive orders are easier to track these days, with the publication and numbering requirements, but presidential memoranda and proclamations are not. No one knows how many memoranda there are or what they all cover. Historians estimate there may be as many as 50,000 floating around. The American Precedent Although there is no explicit constitutional authority for executive actions, all presidents have employed them, and scholars generally accept they are implied by Article II, Section 3’s requirement that the president “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Presidents Adams and Monroe issued one executive order apiece during their tenures, the fewest of any president (save President William Harrison, who died after a month in office). President Washington issued eight. Among them are an order that all Americans act “friendly and impartial” in the war between Britain and France, and another establishing a national day of Thanksgiving in late November. President Lincoln issued 42 executive orders. His General War Order 1 sent Union troops to war against “insurgent forces,” and another ordered the arrest of all newspaper editors favoring the rebellion. The Emancipation Proclamation freeing slaves in southern states was both a presidential proclamation and an executive order. President Grant, a former general used to issuing orders, issued more than 200 of them. Several created modern Indian Reservations, based only on broad congressional authority to relocate Native American tribes. President Franklin Roosevelt, in contrast, issued nearly 4,000 executive orders. His Executive Order 9066 authorized the removal of any people from military areas “as deemed necessary or desirable.” The military would later define the entire U.S. West Coast as a “military area,” and order the removal of Japanese-Americans to internment camps. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-surprisingly-contentious-history-of-executive-orders_b_58914580e4b04c35d583546e 3/8 4/2/2020 The Surprisingly Contentious History Of Executive Orders | HuffPost (Congress approved funding for internment by statute several months later, after only an hour and a half of debate.) Roosevelt’s Executive Order 7034 organized the Works Progress Administration, one of the central pillars of his response to the Great Depression, which employed more than 3 million people and wielded a budget of nearly $70 billion in 2017 dollars. Subscribe to the Politics email. From Washington to the campaign trail, get the latest politics news. [email protected] SUBSCRIBE The other World War president, Woodrow Wilson, issued nearly 2,000 executive orders, including Executive Order 1885, which established U.S. sovereignty over the Panama Canal Zone. President Truman issued Executive Order 9981, desegregating the military. Executive Order 10730, during the Eisenhower era, sent federal troops to enforce desegregation in Alabama schools. President Kennedy’s Executive Order 10924 established the Peace Corps, while his Executive Order 10925 for the first time required government contractors to take “affirmative action” to ensure non-discrimination in employment. President Johnson’s Executive Order 11246 broke new ground in prohibiting discrimination in federal employment decisions on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, and President Ford’s Executive Order 11905 banned political assassination by intelligence agencies. President Reagan issued 381 executive orders; his Executive Order 12333 established the National Security Agency. President Clinton issued 364 executive orders, including Executive Order 13166, which declared the former Yugoslavia a “combat zone” and initiated military action in Kosovo. The dozen years of both President Bushes saw 457 executive orders on issues ranging from the collapse of the Soviet Union to the War on Terror. President Obama issued 277 executive orders during his eight-year tenure, which is the fewest for any two-term president since Grover Cleveland. These included Executive Order https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-surprisingly-contentious-history-of-executive-orders_b_58914580e4b04c35d583546e 4/8 4/2/2020 The Surprisingly Contentious History Of Executive Orders | HuffPost 13694, sanctioning Russia for cyberattacks during the 2016 elections, and Executive Order 13658, requiring federal contractors to pay an increased minimum wage. Obama also utilized presidential memoranda and proclamations to accomplish significant goals, and to a somewhat greater extent than prior presidents — Obama probably issued about a third more memoranda than his immediate predecessor, President Bush, and perhaps as many as his executive orders. But presidential memoranda aren’t all counted or published, so it’s hard to know how many either issued precisely. Obama’s published memoranda designated Alaskan coasts off-limits to drilling, altered immigration policy for “Dreamers,” and set government research priorities. Checked and Balanced Executive actions can be, and often are, repealed. A new president can simply issue a new executive order or memorandum that withdraws or replaces a previous one. Congress can also legislate to overturn an executive order, or refuse to fund an executive action that requires funding. The courts have served as an occasional forum for challenging executive orders. In 1952, at the height of the Korean War, strikes at steel mills led President Truman to issue Executive Order 10340, which authorized the Secretary of Commerce to seize and nationalize steel mills and require continuing operation. A lawsuit by the mill owners led the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down Truman’s action as unconstitutional and in excess of his
Recommended publications
  • Lydia Polgreen Editor-In-Chief, Huffpost Media Masters – April 4, 2019 Listen to the Podcast Online, Visit
    Lydia Polgreen Editor-in-Chief, HuffPost Media Masters – April 4, 2019 Listen to the podcast online, visit www.mediamasters.fm Welcome to Media Masters, a series of one to one interviews with people at the top at the media game. Today I’m here in New York and joined by Lydia Polgreen, editor-in-chief of HuffPost. Appointed in 2016, she previously spent 15 years at the New York Times where she served as foreign correspondent in Africa and Asia. She received numerous awards for her work, including a George Polk award for her coverage of ethnic violence in Darfur in 2006. Lydia carried out a number of roles at the Times, most recently as editorial director of NYT global. She’s also a board member at Columbia Journalism Review, and the Committee to Protect Journalists. Lydia, thank you for joining me. It’s a pleasure to be here. So Lydia, editor-in-chief of HuffPost, obviously an iconic brand with an amazing history. Where are you going to take it next? Well, I think past is prologue and the future is unknown. Oh, that’s good. I like that already. We’re starting off on the deeply profound. Continue! Well, I think for media right now, it’s a really fascinating moment of both rediscovery of our roots – and those roots really lie in what’s at the core of journalism, which is exposing things that weren’t meant to be known, or that people, important people especially, don’t want to be known, and bringing them to light.
    [Show full text]
  • John C. Andrews
    Verizon Media EMEA Limited 5-7 Point Square, North Wall Quay Dublin 1, Ireland Tel.: +353 1 866 3100 Fax: +353 1 866 3101 Reg: 426324 Commissioner Didier Reynders EUROPEAN COMMISSION JUSTICE Rue de la Loi, 200 1049 Brussels BELGIUM 2 April 2020 Dear Commissioner Reynders, I refer to the letter dated 24 March addressed to our CEO Mr. Guru Gowrappan. Verizon Media, the parent company of Yahoo, HuffPost, AOL and TechCrunch, is focused on making a positive impact on society during this challenging time. We are committed to providing our users with information they can trust and keeping our platforms safe from malicious actors who may seek to take advantage of the COVID-19 crisis. We have carefully monitored the COVID-19 public health emergency and are scrutinizing all ads with an increased focus on sensitivity to public health guidance and risks. Our Ad Policies prohibit ads that claim that any medicine, surgical treatment, or device can prevent or cure coronavirus. Our automated systems flag high-risk ads for manual review and those that violate policy, including COVID-19-related ads, are blocked. We recognize that our 900 million users across the globe rely on us to deliver accurate, reliable news and information. To this end, we have created a coronavirus hub, covid19.yahoo.com, across the Yahoo ecosystem (News, Finance, Sports, Lifestyle & Entertainment), that includes news in real-time about the pandemic across the globe. There is specific content for specific markets, including France (fr.yahoo.com/topics/liste-coronavirus-france), Italy ​ ​ (it.yahoo.com/topics/coronavirus), Germany (de.yahoo.com/topics/Coronavirus), Spain ​ ​ ​ ​ (es.yahoo.com/topics/coronavirus) and the UK (uk.yahoo.com/topics/coronavirus-news).
    [Show full text]
  • Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020
    Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020 Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020 Nic Newman with Richard Fletcher, Anne Schulz, Simge Andı, and Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Supported by Surveyed by © Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism / Digital News Report 2020 4 Contents Foreword by Rasmus Kleis Nielsen 5 3.15 Netherlands 76 Methodology 6 3.16 Norway 77 Authorship and Research Acknowledgements 7 3.17 Poland 78 3.18 Portugal 79 SECTION 1 3.19 Romania 80 Executive Summary and Key Findings by Nic Newman 9 3.20 Slovakia 81 3.21 Spain 82 SECTION 2 3.22 Sweden 83 Further Analysis and International Comparison 33 3.23 Switzerland 84 2.1 How and Why People are Paying for Online News 34 3.24 Turkey 85 2.2 The Resurgence and Importance of Email Newsletters 38 AMERICAS 2.3 How Do People Want the Media to Cover Politics? 42 3.25 United States 88 2.4 Global Turmoil in the Neighbourhood: 3.26 Argentina 89 Problems Mount for Regional and Local News 47 3.27 Brazil 90 2.5 How People Access News about Climate Change 52 3.28 Canada 91 3.29 Chile 92 SECTION 3 3.30 Mexico 93 Country and Market Data 59 ASIA PACIFIC EUROPE 3.31 Australia 96 3.01 United Kingdom 62 3.32 Hong Kong 97 3.02 Austria 63 3.33 Japan 98 3.03 Belgium 64 3.34 Malaysia 99 3.04 Bulgaria 65 3.35 Philippines 100 3.05 Croatia 66 3.36 Singapore 101 3.06 Czech Republic 67 3.37 South Korea 102 3.07 Denmark 68 3.38 Taiwan 103 3.08 Finland 69 AFRICA 3.09 France 70 3.39 Kenya 106 3.10 Germany 71 3.40 South Africa 107 3.11 Greece 72 3.12 Hungary 73 SECTION 4 3.13 Ireland 74 References and Selected Publications 109 3.14 Italy 75 4 / 5 Foreword Professor Rasmus Kleis Nielsen Director, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ) The coronavirus crisis is having a profound impact not just on Our main survey this year covered respondents in 40 markets, our health and our communities, but also on the news media.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Limits of Executive Civil Rights Policymaking
    Oklahoma Law Review Volume 61 Number 1 2008 Exploring the Limits of Executive Civil Rights Policymaking Stephen Plass St. Thomas University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Law and Race Commons, and the President/ Executive Department Commons Recommended Citation Stephen Plass, Exploring the Limits of Executive Civil Rights Policymaking, 61 OKLA. L. REV. 155 (2008), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol61/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oklahoma Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXPLORING THE LIMITS OF EXECUTIVE CIVIL RIGHTS POLICYMAKING STEPHEN PLASS* Racial equality for blacks remains a minefield issue for American presidents. Any position a president takes is bound to alienate someone. As a result, even a well-meaning president such as Bill Clinton has had to tread very carefully when addressing this topic.1 Popular attitudes shaped by the powerful continue to dictate the extent to which presidents are able to confront continuing racial discrimination and its legacy of inequality in American life.2 Although many laws ordaining racial equality have been written, discrimination remains a normal part of life in America. This reality makes the President’s role in this area almost as difficult
    [Show full text]
  • Liberal Parents, Liberal Children | Huffpost
    Liberal Parents, Liberal Children | HuffPost US EDITION T H E B LOG 01/26/2009 05:12 am ET| Updated May 25, 2011 Liberal Parents, Liberal Children By Marty Kaplan When it comes to politics, today’s college freshmen resemble their baby boomer parents of 40 years ago in all ways except two. One way makes perfect sense; the other is a puzzle. The evidence about kids and their parents isn’t anecdotal; it’s documented in a study just released by UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute, which has been investigating the attitudes of a massive national sample of American freshmen since the 1960s. More freshmen today say they frequently discuss politics than at any time since Lyndon Johnson announced that he wouldn’t run for re-election. Just since 2000, that slice of young people — 35.6 percent — has more than doubled, and it even exceeds by a couple of points the previous high-water mark, when Richard Nixon was elected president. When you add in the number of today’s freshmen who say they occasionally discuss politics, you’re talking about nearly 86 percent of them, another record. Today, the proportion of freshmen calling themselves liberal has hit 31 percent, the highest it’s been in 35 years. At the same time, the number of students calling their political views middle-of-the-road has hit an all-time low, just over 43 percent, territory it hasn’t been in since 1970. Only one out of five students today describes him or herself as conservative, an erosion of more than two points since the year before.
    [Show full text]
  • CPM Client City of Richmond Files Lawsuit Against President Trump's "Sanctuary Jurisdictions" Executive Order
    CPM Client City of Richmond Files Lawsuit Against President Trump's "Sanctuary Jurisdictions" Executive Order � 2017 Attorneys Joseph W. Cotchett The City of Richmond has filed a lawsuit today in the Federal District Court in San Francisco against President Donald Trump, Attorney Practice Areas General Jeff Sessions, and Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly, Municipal & Public Entity Litigation seeking to have declared unconstitutional an Executive Order issued by President Trump concerning “Sanctuary Jurisdictions.” The lawsuit alleges that Executive Order 13768, issued on January 25, 2017, is an unconstitutional action by the President as it provides unfettered discretion to the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security to take away all federal funds from “sanctuary jurisdictions” which they believe do not follow federal immigration law. The suit alleges that the President does not have authority under the Constitution or any Congressional act to restrict federal funds based on such an Executive Order. The Executive Order does not define “sanctuary jurisdictions” and while there are many cities that have been referred to as “sanctuary cities,” there is no definition of either term. Under the vague and far-reaching language of the Executive Order, Richmond could lose federal funds without having violated any federal immigration policy. Richmond’s Mayor, Tom Butt, stated on behalf of the City Council: “Over 25 years ago, the Richmond City Council enacted an ordinance as a result of immigration raids by federal officers by setting forth a procedure for Richmond police to respond to requests for information by federal immigration authorities. We are confident that the policies we have put in place to promote a community policing culture comply with all federal laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Fortress of Liberty: the Rise and Fall of the Draft and the Remaking of American Law
    Fortress of Liberty: The Rise and Fall of the Draft and the Remaking of American Law Jeremy K. Kessler∗ Introduction: Civil Liberty in a Conscripted Age Between 1917 and 1973, the United States fought its wars with drafted soldiers. These conscript wars were also, however, civil libertarian wars. Waged against the “militaristic” or “totalitarian” enemies of civil liberty, each war embodied expanding notions of individual freedom in its execution. At the moment of their country’s rise to global dominance, American citizens accepted conscription as a fact of life. But they also embraced civil liberties law – the protections of freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and procedural due process – as the distinguishing feature of American society, and the ultimate justification for American military power. Fortress of Liberty tries to make sense of this puzzling synthesis of mass coercion and individual freedom that once defined American law and politics. It also argues that the collapse of that synthesis during the Cold War continues to haunt our contemporary legal order. Chapter 1: The World War I Draft Chapter One identifies the WWI draft as a civil libertarian institution – a legal and political apparatus that not only constrained but created new forms of expressive freedom. Several progressive War Department officials were also early civil libertarian innovators, and they built a system of conscientious objection that allowed for the expression of individual difference and dissent within the draft. These officials, including future Supreme Court Justices Felix Frankfurter and Harlan Fiske Stone, believed that a powerful, centralized government was essential to the creation of a civil libertarian nation – a nation shaped and strengthened by its diverse, engaged citizenry.
    [Show full text]
  • Trump Tax Cuts Could Start with Executive Action
    RobertRobert W. W. Wood Wood THETHE TAX TAX LAWYER LAWYER TAXES 2/27/2017 Trump Tax Cuts Could Start With Executive Action U.S. President Donald Trump flanked by business leaders holds a executive order establishing regulatory reform officers and task forces in US agencies in the Oval Office of the White House on February 24, 2017 in Washington, DC. Earlier in the day, Trump stated he would cut 75 percent of regulations. (Photo by Olivier Douliery – Pool/Getty Images) So far, President Trump has moved boldly—or rashly, depending on your perspective—with many executive actions, including: Proclamation 9570: National Day of Patriotic Devotion Executive Order 13765: Minimizing the Economic Burden of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Pending Repeal A Memorandum that was a type of Regulatory Freeze memo Pending Review Presidential Memorandum: Withdrawal of the United States From the Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Agreement Presidential Memorandum: Mexico City Policy, reinstituting and expanding a policy President Obama had rescinded restricting the use of foreign aid money to support family planning organizations that promote abortion. Presidential Memorandum: a federal Hiring Freeze Presidential Memorandum to bring back consideration of the Construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline Presidential Memorandum to reconsider Construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline Presidential Memorandum to review Construction of American Pipelines Executive Order 13766 Expediting Environmental Reviews and Approvals for High Priority Infrastructure Projects Presidential Memorandum Streamlining Permitting and Reducing Regulatory Burdens for Domestic Manufacturing Proclamation 9571: National School Choice Week, 2017 Executive Order 13767: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, the “build the wall” executive order.
    [Show full text]
  • Harry S Truman U.S
    National Park Service Harry S Truman U.S. Department of the Interior Harry S Truman National Historic Site Truman & Civil Rights Given his background, Harry Truman was an unlikely champion of civil rights. Where he grew up—the border state of Missouri—segregation was accepted and largely unquestioned. Both his maternal and paternal grandparents had even owned slaves. Truman’s background notwithstanding, some would say it was Truman who energized the modern civil rights movement, paving the way for future legislative successes of the 1960s. Truman’s Missouri Roots Harry Truman’s civil rights views as President Truman’s experience as an officer in World War surprised many because they seemed to contradict I and post-war business dealings with a Jewish his upbringing. Truman grew up in a former slave partner also broadened his perspectives. By 1940, as state where his small-town, rural surroundings he sought reelection to the US Senate, his viewpoint included segregation and subordination for many of had matured. its citizens. In a speech in Sedalia, Missouri, he said, “I believe Black residents lived in a separate section of town, in the brotherhood of man, not merely the brother- attended a different school, and were prevented hood of white men, but the brotherhood of all men from shopping at most stores. In his early letters, before law. I believe in the Constitution and the the young Harry Truman reflected on his back- Declaration of Independence. In giving the Negroes ground by frankly admitting prejudices against the rights which are theirs, we are only acting in ac- blacks and Asians.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigration Enforcement
    IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT This is an excerpt from Inside the Numbers: How Immigration Shapes Asian American and Pacific Islander Communities, a report published by Asian Americans Advancing Justice—AAJC and Asian Americans Advancing Justice—Los Angeles in June 2019. The report is available for download: https:// advancingjustice-aajc.org/inside-the-numbers-report-2019 ISSUE BRIEF: IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT: ARRESTS, DETENTION, AND DEPORTATION Within five days of taking office, President Trump issued several executive orders that made sweeping changes to our immigration enforcement system. Through these major policy shifts, the administration has rapidly increased arrests, detention, and deportations of immigrants in the interior of the United States, and severely curtailed the due process rights of immigrants along the southern border. The federal government has the authority to exercise prosecutorial discretion in immigration enforcement, meaning that immigration officials may decide whether to arrest, detain, and deport an immigrant. Previous Republican and Democratic administrations adhered to priorities that focused enforcement on certain individuals. For example, the Obama administration issued immigration enforcement priorities that shielded around 87% of the undocumented immigrant population from deportation. In contrast, the Trump administration has explicitly abandoned all forms of prosecutorial discretion and has directed federal agencies to employ “all lawful means” to deport “all removable” noncitizens. As a result, the enforcement agencies Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection Since 2017, we have (CBP) have enacted a dragnet enforcement approach, escalating raids and arrests witnessed a drastic across the country, and striking fear into immigrant communities.159 increase in targeted enforcement against Since 2017, we have witnessed a drastic increase in targeted enforcement long-time community against long-time community members, including many long-term residents and refugees.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuskegee Airmen Chronology Daniel L. Haulman Organizational
    TUSKEGEE AIRMEN CHRONOLOGY DANIEL L. HAULMAN ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY BRANCH AIR FORCE HISTORICAL RESEARCH AGENCY MAXWELL AFB, AL 36112-6424 14 November 2011 1 TUSKEGEE AIRMEN CHRONOLOGY Dr. Daniel L. Haulman Chief, Organization History Division Air Force Historical Research Agency Expanded Edition: 30 September 2011 27 June 1939: Congress passed the Civilian Pilot Training Act. (Robert J. Jakeman, The Divided Skies.) September-October 1939: The Civil Aeronautics Administration received Tuskegee Institute’s application to be a civilian pilot training institution, and after Tuskegee obtained permission to use the Montgomery Airport as a facility, the application was approved. (Robert J. Jakeman, The Divided Skies) Late February 1940: The Civil Aeronautics Authority approved Tuskegee’s Kennedy Field for Civilian Pilot Training, after improvements to the field, eliminating Tuskegee Institute’s need to use the Montgomery Airport. (Robert J. Jakeman, The Divided Skies) 25 March 1940: George A. Wiggs arrived in Tuskegee to administer the standard written examination required of all Civilian Pilot Training students. Every student who took the examination passed, surpassing the passing rate of other schools in the South. (Robert J. Jakeman, The Divided Skies.) 16 September 1940: Congress passed a Selective Service Act which required all the armed services to enlist “Negroes”. On the same day, the War Department announced that the Civil Aeronautics Authority, in cooperation with the U.S. Army, would start the development of “colored personnel” for the aviation service. (Public Law 783, 16 September 1940; War Department Press Release, 16 September 1940; 99th Fighter Squadron summary history in the lineage and honors folder of the 99th Flying Training Squadron at the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA), Maxwell AFB, AL) Late October 1940: In a press release, President Franklin D.
    [Show full text]
  • Association of American Law Schools Section on Labor Relations and Employment Law: Tributes Honoring Senior Law Professors
    ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN LAW SCHOOLS SECTION ON LABOR RELATIONS AND EMPLOYMENT LAW: TRIBUTES HONORING SENIOR LAW PROFESSORS A TRIBUTE HONORING JAMES E. JONES, JR.* Professor Vicki Schultz**: Good morning. I'm Vicki Schultz, the 2004 Chair of the Labor and Employment Law Section of the Association of American Law Schools. Last year, my predecessor, Professor Roberto Corrada, initiated a practice of having our section honor someone who has made a significant contribution to our field. This morning, it is my great pleasure to be able to honor my dear friend and colleague James E. Jones, Jr., the Nathan P. Feinsinger Professor of Labor Law, Emeritus at the University of Wisconsin Law School and the School of Labor and Industrial Relations. There is so much to say about this brilliant and big-hearted man; I can't even begin to cover his many achievements in the time available. So, let me simply touch on a few of his most significant contributions to the law, the field, and the university he loves so much, and to his students and colleagues, who, in turn, love him so much. I. DEVELOPING EARLY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION LAW Before he joined the legal academy, Professor Jones had already had a significant career in the United States Department of Labor. He began as a legislative attorney, progressed to Counsel for Labor Relations, Director of the Office of Labor Management Policy Development, and then became Associate Solicitor, Division of Labor Relations and Civil Rights in the Office of the Solicitor of Labor. During that phase of his career, Professor Jones played an important role in developing and defending the emerging concept of affirmative action in employment.
    [Show full text]