◆ SpookStack

ee a se Penner Butler Bill re [The ‘Jenner-Butler | bill cau | the Senate judiciary committee labors under the initial handicap of having no other title ghat accu- rately and briefly describes it. It ‘is loosely called a bill to limit the ‘ appellate jurisdiction of theTsu-_ f preme court, but there is only one s “\provision—a separated one—that ; ‘invokes this Constitutional Con- m@ gressional right: This is in respect to state rules for admission to the = _ bar. ’ The three other provisions rep- resent an omnibus or quasi-omni- ‘bus effort to carry out, irkas many 2 instances, an indisputably normal “gt function of Congress, depending in ; No sense on the “jurisdiction regu- | lation’ clause. Where the supreme court has decided cases on the bas- is of the intent of Congress, the “meaning of statutory statements, it is perfectly proper for Congress to Flarify and amend the statut la the court cannot if it still . fit strike down the new language. punishment, statutory handling. + called a bill to correct jcertain | Strained interpretations of ‘the su- “preme court and (in one instance only) any and all interpretations, oO involving national security. °. ie tof Saal tee were ne oily 6 3 MAY 27 958. Vato uage; and this does not mfan' es | The common link between each section and the two main parts is +. subversion — its Aiscouragement, subject of legislative inquiry” ' The bill could in this connection be _ baffling: ~ Sie ~. The bilLlabors under the further handicap of being Virtwallyeisn- ; known in content. With the better j ; conservation ‘of ‘national security in respect to quisling fifth-eolumn- | ists as a prethise, theré should be [ widespread interest in whether the | bill, in whole and in part, in. the ° language employed and the meth- ; i ods adopted, actually. has’ promise or the best promise, of attairiing or moving toward attainment, of the purpose. It has, however, been in- jadequately reported; and one re- sult has been the encouragement. of off-cuff disparagement by a few critics who seem to want all the . issues smothered in a shouting match, Each section of the proposal as basic reference to controversiaf de- cisign of the’ supreme court# In each case the text of the decision should be basic to the background. Few people for example’ know what principles were involved or said to be invblved in the court's taking jurisdiction of state bar ad- ae ee |missions, except that Communists { or Fifth Amendimenteers figured. - If the section based on the Wat- kins “pertinency”. case is correctly | reported, it still does not go far nough to meet the main and most roublesome part of that trouble. ome decision; namely, that the’ irst must be made clear to a wit- ness endangered by. a cgntempt sentence. How it could have been made any clearer, by any individu- al in this particular case abe) 6 conetigeawn tabi is Sime’y Miss Gandy eevee ee The Tike o#Picopune New Orleans, La, May 12, 1958 Page 12 Col 2 Edttorial George W, Healy Jr. Editor EC. ZA RIS BO. f\ RECARDpE Busy 26, 58 SS eee