◆ SpookStack

—_— " recent rulings involving Congressional authority, internal subver- Sion and international affairs, He concluded by holding that Lawyers ought to back the Court “whether they agreed with the de- cisions or not." That the opinion of Senator Javits ie not shared by many is far from the truth, Liberals, Communist sympathizers and many well meaning Americans, who have traditionally looked upon the Court's decisions as Sacrofanct, are in agreement with hin. Senator Javits' position is preposterous. Though the Couri » it i@ Composed of nine men who rc: make miaetakes as do lawyers, congresamen and human beings in gener- al. The nine nen represent every shade of background, religion, politica and philosophy. The thought that no one should differ wit the Supreme Court is dangerous. To remain silent regardless of the Court's decisions, even though error is suspected or discovered would make it impossibie that the wrong can be corrected. The Court would not, under such circumstances, be the Bupreme Court, bu the Government. The nine justices would not be judges but dictator in a judicial oligarchy, The reaction to Senator Javits'entreatieos to the lawyers was summarized by the retiring President of the American Bar Assoc. ation, who accused the Court of exercising “superstate powers" wher 4t ruled that a man could not be denied a license to practise law on the ground he was a former Communist, Suffice it to say that th American Bar Asscciation refused even to entertain the Javits' resc ‘lution decrying "contemptuous" criticism of the Supreme Court. b The Supreme Court does not always agree with the Suprene Court. In 1956 it decided that soldiers’ wives must answer to Military Courts Martial overseas; in 1957 it decided otherwise, fre ing two wives for the murder of their soldier husbands after con- viction by Military Courts Martial thus releasing two convicted sur deresses who can never be prosecutéd for their crime. In the past, members of the Court, and even Presidents, bave been outspoken in criticizing the majority opinions, Justice Owen J. Roberts, who wrote the dissenting opinion in the case of Buith v. Allwright, wherein the Suprese Court reverzed prior de- cisions of the court, had this to say: "I have expressed my views with respect to the present policy of the Court freely to disregarc and to overrule considered decisions and the rules of law announced in them. This tendency, it seems to me, indicates an