|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
Pa. will no longer make candidates take 'loyalty oath'
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Container
|
| Contributor | Scott³ |
| Last Edited | Scott³ Aug 27, 2006 06:25pm |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | News |
| Media | Newspaper - Easton Express-Times |
| News Date | Monday, August 28, 2006 12:00:00 AM UTC0:0 |
| Description | AP Newswire article.
An excerpt...
"Candidates for public office in Pennsylvania will no longer have to sign a McCarthy-era loyalty oath pledging that they are not "subversive," a change ordered by the state attorney general after the requirement was challenged.
John Staggs, a meatpacker, refused to sign the oath when he turned in nominating petitions earlier this year, and threatened to sue the state. Now, Attorney General Tom Corbett has told election officials to stop enforcing the requirement because it is unconstitutional.
"I believe their definition of 'subversive' can really apply to anyone," said Staggs, 59, who is challenging Rep. Rosita Youngblood, D-Philadelphia, in the November election. "They want to be able to pick and choose, so they can use it versus people who are challenging the status quo."
The 1951 law describes as subversive anyone who advocates or takes part in "any act intended to overthrow, destroy (or) alter" the government. It also says "advocacy" of "violence or force" is a prerequisite to being a subversive.
The U.S. Supreme Court declared an Indiana loyalty oath unconstitutional in 1974. In that case, the court found that the oath violated free-speech rights by equating an abstract belief in radical change with inciting "imminent" violence.
In Pennsylvania, however, the loyalty oath continued to be administered in most elections." |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
