◆ SpookStack

a. 7 0-19 (Rev, 7-1 8- a & _ ne PSETTEL oh ” Supreme Court crite 19 7 Much is being said and written‘these : _ days in deprecation of a declin ublte respect for and support of th | Court and its decisions. That thee has : “T been | such a decline is hardly open to | question. It is reflected in the current i ‘efforts in Congress to modify and even © to overturn recent rulings by the court. , It manifests itself, often in ugly form, * : in bitter opposition in the South to the.’ school decision. Severe criticism of the: ' court is freely expressed by many law- | i yers and lower Federal judges, although _ this is seldom heard publicly. - In short, for a variety of reasons, some of which may be valid and some of which may not be, the prestige of the ' court has suffered. If no longer speaks r with an authority which derives from full public confidence in the detached and disinterested nature of its pro- nouncements. 4 Those who deplore this state of affairs say that a first duty of the good . eltizen is to respect and support the rulings of the court. But this, we sug- gest, misses the main point, which is s] ¢ : f . ' tr ' eee wat . 7 4 en LE - a of themselves, must be such as to com-, mand public tespect.’ And it is self- evident, we believe, that the court itself has failed on this score. One of the strongest items of proof in support of this belief is a remarkable . resolution Just submitted to the annual Conference of (State) Chief Justices. The resolution was drafted by a com- | — Te ng oe OE | mittee of nine chief justices, including hest judicial officers .ln_guch States as New York, Michigan, Wiscon-__ - - 16? “to ih ces aa - excited demagogue, Oey that the decisions of the court, in and | Cee ee ee ee v + They believe that the Supreme Court . “too often has tended to adopt the role .. of policy maker without proper judictal ” restraint... ." And they say, that “in” . the light of the immense power of the Supreme Court and its practical nonre- - viewablility in most instances, no more important obligation rests upon “it, in. our view, than that of careful mo tion in the exercise of its policy-making . role.” These are not the words of some They reflect the considered judgment of men n who have .., attained the highest judicial staturé in . thelr respective Statea. ‘we think the criticlsms which they put. forward are justified, and there is no. For our part, room for substantial doubt that the sentiments which they express are Closely identified with the sentime hich have prompted the so-callkd: _. ‘|pttacks” on the court both in and t: Congtess. f°: ek . oe hy elo: eros Sanit aa el Bmpr b Py c 142-228 &5-A ba NOT RECORDED SEP 4 1958 a en ER Be cesar seme ow + a ms dera-" . 4 a md Kp er ! i ison yw VY otmont ease - Parson Rosen amm " gin,Qragon and Massachusetts ratte jurists say that any study of recent ce. a cisions of the Supreme Court will raise: Tele. Room _ ‘at least considerable doubt that “we Holloman __*_ have a government of laws, not of mer.” - Ge ady an Wash. Post and mac T-—t 3. T imes Herala ~ Wash. News Wash, Star ATG N. Y. Herald Tribune N. Y. Jqurnal~..__ American N. Y. Mirrer N. Y. Daily News —_ N, Y¥. Times Se 8 tS Daily Worker The Worker New Leader —————_- nn ar Date AUG 2% 1356 ate