◆ SpookStack

a | ! 3 ‘ ! | A Q - Worn ey so ara Supreme diana has come forward With *———-s-ng¥él solution to the con- troversy that has arisen as a result of recent decisions of the Supremie- Court of the United Btatés.. - wa? - The Indiana jurist, who has served ‘a term as chief justice under! the rotating system in Indiana, was re- sponsible ‘for the resolution, Presented a year ago at the Conference of State Chief Justices, which resulted in a comprehensive report ap- Proved last month by 36 of the State Chief Justices, crit- deizing decisions of the Na- tion's highest court. He rec- ommends’ now thet there should be a new court set up by constitutional amendment rE a - ch would be known as the urt < of Constitutional Defi- if pee ae letter to this corre- spondent, Judge Arterburn presents a plan which, if it had ‘been in effect in 1954, would have prevented the present. dispute on the legali- tes of the segregation-inte- ftation question from de- vélopii at all. His letter. makes no mention of this issue but Is confined solely te recent reversals of its own rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States in cases concerning Federal- State re- jationships. “Not. only lawyers, but. . thinking taymen all over the " Nation,” writes Judge Arter- burn, “are disturbed by the tendency to regard the indi- vidual philosophy of the judges of the United States Supreme Court aa the ‘law of the land’ and «a substitute for stable and fixed principles of construction and interpre- tation of the Constitution, When ipng-established deci- sions arid Precedent are over- turned, * “lawyers snd Judges find. ourselyés in an pocharted sea with nothing guide us, subject to the vagaries ot a dislocated com- ‘pass... ” “The framers ot our Con-- ‘atitution did not concelva of” ‘the organic stricture of our | _ Government an . piece of ce ia. saa ie he “te Po arr cs Be a Tay bash 3 ‘Sep 30 1950 ¢ urbing Supreme Cour Ou brit "Prop sees Tribunal to Define Ae .. ~ Constityti as Guide for Court:'; a _ ¢ Norman un putty that could be ‘molded and shaped as times changed until it no longer ‘résembled the original framework. ‘They felt they were building a structure of solid permanency with the opportunity to re- model or make additions -through the amending clause | only. There has, however, de- veloped in this country a legal theory that the Con- stitution should be stretched to meet any contingency re- sulting from changes in eco~ nomic and social progress, Those groups use the catch- phrases and cliches of a ‘Uv- ing instrument,’ ‘growing with the times.’ The framers of the Constitution would have made provisions” for such ‘stretching’ if they had in- tended the Constitution to be - altered other than through the amending clause. . ... | “The United States Con- ‘stitution does say the. ‘Con- stitution and the laws of the United States which shall be ‘made in pursuance thereof; and all Areaties .. . shall be the supreme law “ot the land; Bis Sesee ape We Pelt 1G AS ant the judges in every State shall be bound thereby . ...' “It does not say the deci- sions of the United States Supreme Court on such ques- tions shall be the supreme. law of the land. The exer- else of such a power js one usurped by the court and, in effect, gives to the judiciary & veto Dower over the acts and functions of all other departments and agencies of the Government. Although the right to be the final | arbiter of what the Consti- tution means is without any expressed grant in the Con- stitution, it is, nevertheless, {#, constitutional — principle ,now so firmly imbedded in our legal and political think- ing. that its. permanency cannot at this time be sert- ously questioned, regardless of its merits, I do not mean to intimate that I feel the principle should be eliminated or ts without merit. My com-. ment is that it is time that “we gave consideration to the means and methods by which the perveraton of this Prinel- , aati ya ‘ bounds coe Ua “ . . Sih which for the ae ¢ which f a r ¢ defines~and Interprets « ‘the Constitution becomes for” all purposes as part of the” Constitution as if. written + therein. Any attempt to - change such s meaning’ by | the United States Supreme": Court thereafter’ haa same effect ag amending the : Constitution, although not done in the method and mane " ner provided in the Constitus | tion. I -contend that the United States Supreme Court has usurped a right to amend the Constitution by changing its established interpretation and this is done in yviolation orl of the constitutional provi- sion for amending the samé set up for the protection of the States and the citizens thereof. Something ‘more than “viewing with alarm’ ts needed in this crisis since stable constitutional govern-f < ment is imperiled." 4: the « Parsons |) Rosen Tamm Trotter W.C. Sullivan . Tele. Room — Holloman —. Gandy —.____ % ' Judge Arterburn feels that REC- 5 I the membership of such a new court should consist of a judge or former judge of ' G2 - Aa-7Af 6 a United States court,a mem- § ber ‘or former Thember of Congress, a Governor or for- He ‘mer Governor of a State, a fudge or former judge of the highest court of appellate . jurisdiction of a State, and one person who, within 10 years, has not held any office in the Federal or any State ‘government and who would be chosen by g majority vote of the other ‘membera and - be made chief justice of the: The assumption ts that this would afford an opportunity for a person of outstanding legal ability to be chosen. The Procedure would be that, when a question of interpra- ; tation or meaning of the Cone | stitution arose, the “Court of . Constitutional Definition” .* would determine the proper , méening and certify its opin. ion to the United States ‘Sus; preme Court, which would” then incorporate the opinion; within its own ruling and de-{ cide the case in accordance with the interprétation gi by the special court... ~-*'- neecre ‘Rights Bay vet) Cau a fo hS NOT RECORDED” 67 SEP 26 1958 ~ Wash, Post and Times Herald Wash. News Wash. Star AAT N. Y. Herald Tribune N.Y. Journal-____s American N. Y. Mirror N. Y. Daily News —_ N. Y. Times ____ Daily Worker —.__-__ The Worker New Leader Date _SEP 24 1958 -