Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1920-06-08
The Prohibition Decision.


Yesterdays decision by the United
States Supreme Court definitely closes
the prohibition ease, in favor of the
federal amendment and the enforce
ment law There can be no further
proceedings to question the validity of
either, although permission has been
granted to attorneys to file motions
for rehearings. which, in view of the
unanimity of the court on the issues
involved. will surely be unsuccessful.
The courts ruling is explicit and
comprehensive. The amendment was
roperly proposed by Congress and
was properly ratified by the states. 1t
is within the power to amend reserved
by article . of the Constitution, and
1t has become part of the Constitu-
tion and must be respected. The pro-
hibitory section is operative through.
out the entire territorial limits of the
United States and of its own force
invalidates any legislative act, whether
by Congress, by state legislature or
by a territorial assembly, which au-
thorized that which is prohibited by
the amendment. Furthermore-and
here lies the most important phase of
the decision-the enforcement section
of the amendment "does not enable
Congress or the several states to de-
feat or thwart the prohibition. but
only to enforce it by appropriate
means
On the basis of these findings the
court holds that the constitutional
amendment is valid and that the Vol
stead enforcement act does not tran
scend the "limits beyond which Con
gress cannot go in treating beverages"
There was really little. if any doubt,
that the court would uphold the valid
ity of the amendment itself. II had
already negatived the most serious OBJ
lection, based upon the referendum
laws Of certain states. The secondary
objection, that the proposing vote in
the House was not two-thirds of the
full membership, had been previously
met by decisions to the effect that by
"two-thirds' was meant that proper
tion of those voting and not of the full
membership. The third objection, that
the amendment was obnoxious to the
spirit of personal liberty guaranteed
by the Constitution, was covered by
the fact that article 5 respecting
amendments makes, save for methods
of adoption, but a single limitation
upon the amendatory range, that being
that mo state without its consent shall
be deprived of its equal suffrage in
the Senate"
As to the Volstead act, there was
some discussion. Did it exceed the
regulatory powers granted by the
eighteenth amendment The court
holds that the enforcement act is rea
sonable and valid. and it thus becomes
the undeniable law Of the land.
1t is now the duty of the federal
government and Of the states to en-
force the prohibition amendment
through the statutory enactment. State
laws that have been written contrary
to that law become invalid. If they
are not specifically repealed they must
be regarded as nullifed by the SUI
preme Courts decision, unless and un-
til Congress at some future time passes
an amendment to the Volstead act
modifying its provisions.
Further obstruction to the prohibi-
ton principle now become futile. As
the attorney for one of the interests
declared yesterday, "the fight is lost"
The energies of those who object to
prohibition bur who still feel that they
should remain active may be exerted
to secure an amendment of the en-
foreement act. Until, however, that
act is amended, it is the law of the
land and it should be respected.