◆ SpookStack

| 7 au UNIS, po. r= larly that of the Watkins case, took the form of angry outbursts. Onggof the angriest came from the Demac: “he mam of the Senate Permanent & ita. tions subcommittee, folan L. Me “[These decisions] are extremely Pointing and regrettable... itis apparent Hae they dave lent meh counfort aed encouragement to tlie Comurinists ane the erininal elon sts fn omr cae. The precedents feos establish will serie ously famper all Has cnforcenent EL = Ges of our goversment aid weaken nar itera seenrity | 7 7 He was echoed dy the tanking Ree publican on the sae committee, Kurd BE. Mundt of South Dakotas “Phe Su- preme Court has crippled both the lower courts and Congressional comnitters in discharge of their responsibilities.” Bissertlag Opinions On the other hand there were cheers for the Court from) Democratic Sen. Warne Morse: “The Watkins decision is a historical Monument ina glorious record of Su- preme Court decisions protecting indi- vidual liberty.” The conmitiee most ser fousty after tod by the Wathins decision was Une on Un- American Activities, Tf the committee Is to continue, it will alp cost certainky have to have its charter from the House re- vised. It was the vague wording of the present charter (by which the comnii'tee was established in 1938) that was espe- + clhan: disap. Masa Servier: Vietory at last resolution. Who can define the Beane g of “Un-American'?” As for the Department of fustice, the Portion Trad mot yen peared tfram the Joncks case reling when it was thit over the head by list week's Smith PAct decree. : syard Justice Hawser: “Never but never has dhe gov. ernment taken so many sheHackines trom "the Supreme Court jn one period.” The Jencks _ decision, which would cially criticized by Chief Justice Earl tM force the FBI to open its files to de- Warren in delivering the Watkins case majority opinion: “Te would be difficult fo imagine a less explicit authorizing 4 fendants agaist whem such nattertal wwas used, “cuts right across the adniin- istration of justice,” one said. His Four Major Decisions—And What The ae erein y Vhis is what the Supreme Court did: bThe decision: Reversal of the convic- ton of labor leader John T. Watkins for aitempt of Congress. Watkins, once an official of a Communist-dominated union, apoeared in 1954 before the House Un- American Activities Committee and, while willing to answer questions about himself and about people now known to be Communists, he refused to identify other former associates. The Court's ma- pority (6-1) opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Earl Warren, held that dhe com- mittee’s authority was “vague” and that it had no right to ask the questions it did, that Watkins’ rights under the First Amendment had been violated. Justice Vom €. Clark dissented. The meaning: A stricter limit than ever before on the questions which a Congressional iuvestigating committee can compel a witness to answer, The ruling: is expected to upset a number ef simular convictions, most notably that of playwright Arthur Miller, _&The decision: Reversal of the 1952 20 --_The_meaning: TLL A TT NTE I ae conviction of fourteen California Com- mutists under the Smith Act. The ma- jority (6-1) opinion delivered by Justice Jobn M, Harlan held that (1) the trial judge had failed to make clear a dis- tinction between “teaching of forcible averthrow fof the government] as an ab- “tract principle” and any “effort to insti- Bale actin to Uhet end”, (2) that while the Smith Act bars “organizing” a group for_the government's overthrow, the Communist Party had been “organized” in 1945, long enough for Yee Statute of Limitations to have msi out, The court ordered five. of the defeudaies ace quitted, anew triak tor the other nine, Justice Clark dissented. Future Smith Act prosecutions must be more carefully pre- pared. It may become so diffiewlt to con- viet aman under the Smith Act, the law could become a dead letter. The Court's definition of “organize” in this case iitay also affect ather flaws, particularly those ju the antitrust field. PThe decision: Reversal of the 1954 Now the Justice Department also devs the Smith Act decision fo contend with. Until Cougress, the Justice” Depart- ment and the lawer comfy cakl adjust Hiauselves tu the highest tribaani’s datest decisions, vt period ot Jegalistio cliatos seemed? meitable. The dimits of Con- Mresstann) iiqius. the efficacy of the Sinth Act the sanctity. of EBD files--all af these important aspects of govern- ment precedure would pest or sudden ncerian fomrchitions, PENNSYLVANIA: Freedom After Five Ona gray and de crted steeet near Philadedjdines watertrant. Was duhieg bes comting check of Focked Pi soutarday arterngon, The deer of the Ale Hroom Co. was open. Hoihe the pe hoeman found two bodies =the fictorsy owner and a watchman, both wath bhuidweoned heads. That was In December 1y15, Sev menties liter, the police picked np amanghini. 26-vew -old Negro onuned Aaron Tuner whose 6 feet tmches had brought hin the nicknome of “Treetop | Turner had come to Philadelphia fro Marshvillk NUCL, and worked in the wa- tertront produce and fish markets. He had ne money, no friends, no alibi. Un- der police questioning. he signed a confession, For Treetop Turner, the fu- tive ducked not only bleak but brief. At his trial that September, Turne: repudhated his confession, claiming that a pole ch WPS PT { F uture contempt conviction of Prof. Paul M1. Sweezey caf the University of New Hampshire. This was similar to the Watkins case except that it) was a State Legislature—New Hampshire’s— which Sweeseys had defied by refusing fo answer questions on his political be- liefs and activities, Justices Clark and Harold Ho Burton dissented. ~The meaning: The implication, were the same as in the Watkins case fet extouded now to State Legisletures »The decision: That diplomat John “Stewart Sindee was wrongfully dis- wnissed fom the State Departuaent in fustods chew Secretary of State Dean Athos Sorvice was a target of the faite Soo Pseph Ro MeCarthy in his can tign ago “Comuiuniists in the § state Department.” The Court's ruling (8-0) held that Acheson. in. dismissing service, had overruled his own depart ment’s findings and thus viglated regula- tious safeguarding an emplove. The meaning: Reappraisal of the ‘State Department's dismissal procedures 5 Newsweek, July 1, 1957