Edwin H. Cerney Papers

Edwin H. Cerney, a professor in the Art Department of Stockton Junior College (Stockton Unified School District, California) was one of a number of teachers who refused to sign a loyalty oath required under the Levering Act of 1950. Although he continued teaching through the end of the school year (June 1951), his salary was witheld. He left the Stockton School District to seek employment elsewhere and eventually obtained a position at Spelman College in Atlanta, Georgia. Years later, after his retirement and return to California, he filed a claim for unpaid wages. In 1980, Cerney's claim was rejected as were those of other non-signers of the Levering oath.

The Levering Act: The state of California had adopted in its earliest days a loyalty oath binding public officials to uphold the Constitutions of the United States and of California. On October 3, 1950, however, the State Legislature enacted the Levering Act (California Government Code section 3100-3109.) This act created an additional oath that all public employees were required to sign, including the following statement: "And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not been a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the United States or the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means..."

All public employees in the State were required by the Act to take the new additional oath within 30 days of enactment. Failure to take the oath mean that no compensation could be paid to the employee.

The California Supreme Court upheld the oath in 1952 (Pockman v. Leonard). That decision, however, was reversed in 1967 (Vogel v. County of Los Angeles). The Court found that "the oath...is invalid because it bars persons from public employment for a type of association that may not be proscribed consistently with First Amendment rights." After the overturn of Levering, a number of faculty who had been dismissed for refusing to take the oath, demanded reinstatement and reimbursement of lost salary and pension contributions.