Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 1956
File 023
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 1956 - File 023. 1956-09. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. September 17, 2019. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/279/show/232.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1956-09). Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 1956 - File 023. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/279/show/232

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 1956 - File 023, 1956-09, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed September 17, 2019, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/279/show/232.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 9, September 1956
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date September 1956
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 5 1956; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States: This item is in the public domain in the United States and may be used freely in the United States. The item may not be in the public domain under the copyright laws of other countries.
Item Description
Title File 023
Transcript THE SUPREME COURT UNDER FIRE- Presented below are the arguments of those who maintain that the Supreme Court is substituting psychology for law and sociology for the Constitution. These disturbed critics hold that federal preemption has sounded the death knell for states' rights. JUSTICES of the United States Supreme Court have been accused of amending the Constitution rather than interpreting it, substantiat- "ig their decisions by citing sociologists and psychologists. Irate citizens, seeing what little re- Wains of states' sovereignty and cognizant of the rapidity with which the remaining mite is being dissipated, are saying that the judicial line is forming to the left. Much of the present widespread criticism of the .Supreme Court comes "Om high places. The National Asso- eiation of Attorneys General, by a vote °f 28 to 12, adopted a resolution favor- lrig limitation of the power of the United States Supreme Court to determine whether federal laws supercede 'fate laws. Governors Rap Court Also, the forty-eighth conference of governors at Atlantic City in June ended with a rap at the Supreme P)urt. The governors adopted a resolution saying that conference members "'ere concerned by decisions of the ~ourt, which have held that congressional enactments supercede state laws and thus preempt those fields. "embers called on Congress to frame aws that cannot be construed to pre- e,T|pt any field against state action ""'ess such an intent is stated. Senators James O. Eastland (D- g«s.) and Joseph McCarthy (R- , *s-), before a Senate Internal Seeu- r'fv Subcommittee hearing on June 26, stated that although thev did not ae- £"se Chief Justice Earl Warren of .)e"ig a Communist, his expressed judicial opinions have certainly been following the Communist Party line." j, McCarthy said at the beginning of ^-s testimony that the Court was "■anned for the most part by "incompetent, irresponsible, left-wing Judges ™ho regard themselves as a super Confess." He added he thought that the Jjecision in the Commonwealth of '■nnsylvania v. Steve Nelson case showed a "rock-bottom low in judicial Responsibility." A disturbed public has begun to t» r-VCTs Forum News, September. 1956 view the Court as an uncommon denominator, and feels that the newly- minted laws of aforesaid Court are contributing to a Disunited States of America. Representative E. L. Forrester (D- Ga.), speaking before the House of Representatives, quoted George Washington in his "Farewell Address": If, in thc opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be, in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment, in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may he the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.1 Our revered first President was warning the people against the very thing which many persons say exists today. Critics maintain that the Supreme Court is usurping functions which belong exclusively to the states and to Congress. The time was when the Court justified the confidence of the people; it was a veritable roadblock in the pathway of any group seeking to weaken the American government. However, time changed things, say present-day critics. Vacancies occurred, and court- packing became the vogue. Then came an era of usurpation, an era which saw a rewriting of the Constitution. The Court decided that changed conditions called for changed laws, and began to read into the Constitution meanings which many people say were not intended by those who wrote the Constitution. Members Dissent Dissenting members of the Court have themselves cried out against the Court's seemingly irresponsible actions in reversing not only long-standing decisions, but even in reversing its own previous decisions. Justice Roberts, in the case of Smith v. Allwright (321 U. S. 649), stated: The reason for my concern i.s that the instant decision overruling one announced about nine years ago tends to bring adjudications of this tribunal into the same class as a restricted railroad ticket, "good for this day and train only."3 Supreme Court Justice Reed, in a publication entitled Current Biography, is quoted as follows: If by interpretation based on moderation, social and economic experiments, we cm advance steadily toward our objective, we can avoid dangerous experiments of fundamental constitutional change.3 In view of the foregoing it has been claimed by many that there is an intention to change the Constitution, not by amendment, but by interpretation predicated on economic and social experiments. William O. Douglas has stated that instead of being bound by the Constitution, the Supreme Court may change its meaning to something more in line with the Court's ideas of modern needs. In his recent book be stated that the charter of government must be kept current with the times, and that it should not be allowed to become archaic or out of tune with the needs of today. Douglas mentioned, further, that it takes a new generation to catch a broader vision, and that this might require the undoing of the work of predecessors.4 Question fs Raised The question is then raised by critics whether, under such a system, the Constitution would come to have no meaning. In the past there has been a hesitancy to take the Supreme Court to task. Being "supreme," it was thought that its members could do no wrong, that the Justices were worthy of respect and above criticism. Now. however, some people are saying that the Justices have gradually arrogated unto themselves executive and legislative powers. It is charged that they are attempting to run the government in accordance with their own philosophies. Representative Francis E. Walter ( D- Penn.), chairman of the Un-American Activities Committee, has said that sometimes Supreme Court Justices seem to live in ivory towers, with the blinds drawn.5 '84 Congressional Record (1956), pp. 8507-8. ■Ibid., p. 8508. 'Ibid., p. 8509. '/bid., pp. 8509-10. 'Ibid., p. A4332. Page 21
File Name uhlib_1352973_v005_n009_023.jpg