◆ SpookStack

0-19 (Rev. 9-7+56) | Dav LAWRENCE S35 { ew * . pw ve Criticiam from laymen. and lawyers = conce recent. decisions -of thi reme of the Untied Beaten. lately . -been attracting. mach attention, but how do some of the judges through- out the country feel about~ the highest court? .. - - ' There are not many oppor» tunities for Judges to discuss ‘these ioatters publicly. Bit ‘something that occurred the ‘other day at the conference ‘of the chief justices of the ‘highest courts of each of the 48 States throws a light on this question. A substantial thumber of the State chiet Justices favored a resolution ‘condemning in the severest terms some of the recent de- cisions of the Supreme Court ‘of the United States. - ‘+ Here is the full text of the “yesolution offered by Chief ; “Justlee Norman ¥. Arter- of © Supreme Court. ites. 23. “Be it resolved, that it is r oninion that the Tinited tes Supreme Court has transgressed . sound _ legal principles, and in particular, usurped fact. finding func-° Hons in weighing the evi-- dence in the recent cases of Konigsberg v. State Bar of California and Schware vy. Board of Bar Examiners of the State of New Mexicn __ . “Moreover, the United Btates Supreme Court has fnercached upon th the furledie- . poet tion of the State courts in holding, among other things, that applicants seeking ad- tnission to the bare of the State of California and New | Mexico, in examination as to. +. their character and fitness to | ractice law in those respite ve States, may refuse to ‘an-" “awer ‘questions wr enlighten | the examining. d about thelr, past connections and Hepcciations § in é particiluar Communists and com~ istic organizations... ewe declare the past acts long _ economic stamina to with /& committee to report 0 PAaPAe tame! . EPS GTESoIUhS " cants do reflect directly upon - their character and fitness end sre matters relevant for: consideration, Whether or not one who went through a depression . should have had the strength ‘of character, moral fiber and a the emotional appeals of Com- muniste—as most good citi. gers did—or whether ss‘ weakling he succumbs to such ‘Propaganda, is relevant. in the analysis and determina+ tion of the character of such - individualaa The United States Supreme ‘Court is ‘wrong in holding that such acts are of no value in such 4 determination, — “Decisions which are not founded on sound legal prin- ciples or common sense tend . we Undermine confidence in the judicial system and Te spect for the courts. “We further state that one who Is unwilling to give freely all relevant information res" le hhietn nw garding his history and past associations casts doubts up- on his moral character and | fitness to practive law in any State of this Union; and such refusal is a relevant factor to be weighed and considered by a fact finding body on char- acter and flitness. We further - ‘declare that although e United States Supreme Co _ has the authority to fix ! own standards of charact and fitness to practice in the ¢ Federal courta we do not re¢= * ognize nor concede that ft. may do so for the courts of | the several States of this Union." While | stmoat: a majority favored immediate adoption. AMASUL % of the resolution, there were.. a number of justices who were’ in sympathy with It but felt ~ that the subject should await. a further report. Accordipgly,, a moon wae made Oo gp Uy. to the conference next and the resolution which Was‘ i” assogigtions: of. appll- finally adopted declared yy | — Law sg pie nn ry Team poe Es : I. Jurists Look at Supreme Cou ourt. 22° ¢ hief Justices of State High Tribunals~ Reported: Criticizing ‘Team bs pre oe toy? ee" ad Se heeae: “the chief justices ere “United States had ruled. As for the decision In the- Kontgsberg case to which: reference waa made, this was, decided by the Supreme Court of the United Btates bya 6-to-3 vote. Justicad, Frankfurter, Clark and Har- lan dissented. In fact, Justice Harlan, in his lengthy dis- . Sent, wound lp with this ob- servation: “For me, today's decision represents en uns acceptable ‘intrusion inte 4 matter of State concern.” + Many. Americans of the present day do not realise ‘that criticism of the Supreme Court has been frequently expressed in past history and. that perhaps the most severe castigation the high court ever got came from the pen of Thomas Jefferson. In' a letter to # friend in 1820, \ ‘y whe wrote: “Having found, from ex- perience, that impeachment is an impracticable thing, § mere scare-crow, they odn- sider themsélves secure fog ” fife; they skulk from Tesponr . Sibility to public opinion. . An opinion its huddled up in conclave, perhaps by. s mage Jority gf one, delivered das if unanimous, and with the al- lent acquiescence of or timid assnciates, by a crbfty chief judge, who sophijsti- cates the law to his a Pe ine gun of his own Tea- soning. ' (Reproduction ‘Richte . Reserved) ba- 276 06-4. NOT RECORDED wo Tolson Nichols Boardman Belmont Mohr Parsons Rosen Tamm Trotter Nease Tele. Room Holloman | oof Wash. Post and Times Herald Wash. News Wash. Star _A-/ 3 N. Y. Heraid Tribune N.Y. Journal- American N. Y. Mirror N.Y. Daily News N, Y. Times Daily Worker The Worker New Leader Date SOR 2 6 1967 . eee