◆ SpookStack

[ete | 0-19 (Rev. 1-11-60) a - Tolson Parone r Parsons Belmont “ ___ A iera see ming “Supreme. ir ui "Malone. en, Upheld a as a U, Ss. Privilege 5 WASHINGTON, Mar. '2-~commenting on a decision this Week by our highest court, the following 558 has been wade Mm criticism: Vil = “a performance of this kind deprives the Bupreme Court : le of the intellectual respect it needs now more in these demanding times.” ‘ ‘Who says this? Does it come from one of the critics who has been lamenting the decisions of the Supreme Court on states’ rights, comunism, the Fifth Amendment and ma ee ee mm dhe oi a0 OnT is ibs pronouncement by S GUILLLIWOS —s: of the American Bar Assoclation or of the ; Conference of State Supreme Court Justices? Or is it an exclamation by some of the many lawyers and judges who have come to the conclusion that the Supreme Court has uspured legislative functions? e Not at all. The criticism quoted abo as made this week in an editorial in ‘ ew York Times” which for a long time een one of the foremost defenders upreme Court rulings. It so happens that the court is right in } Lawrence Wihis woak's dériston and dosan't deserve the lame being heaped on it by those who don't like the ruling. ut the importance of the criticism is that it clears the air. aserts, in effect, that adverse comment on the Supreme Court not sinful. For, despite the impression that so many mistaken defenders of the court's legislative rulings have sought to con- Ff }) vey in the past, criticism of af . 4 eourt decision is not an “under- mining of the institution"—-the . ; * Phrase so often applied to the court’s critics in recent years even by high officials here. The Right to Criticize . Nobody who is at all familiar 3 i : with our judicial system really .. Lo . _ The Washington Pout end 1 . wants Sed abolish the Supreme! 7 . Times Herald : cide cases in the jurisdiction The Evening Star . : Soe ca cmmecribed. ist New York Herald Tribune _§ 1! provisions of the Constitution. New York Journal-American — But every critic feels he nas A New York Mirror wight to point out faulty - reasoning of the justices. New York Dally News a . The case which arougad the New York Post Pare ve RRA WR erlticlam of “The New York The New York Times ‘ Times” concerned two employ- . ees of the State of California The Worker The New Leader... ——- *. ~ho were dismissed under an : ordinance which says they must be fired if they decline to teatl- Ty before a Congressional com- mittee concerning subversion. They had invoked the Fifth i Amendmeént and | thereby Te -uSped taeda]! about alleged sub- ( versibe affiliations. ee 1 MAR 14 1960 bx- noT a 72. 17 MAR 14 360 amare - 2 AEBEE B oRDES Oe atl The Wall Street Journal MAR3 1860