Evening star., 1924-04-20

tell Congress that what has been
done is wrong. but II cannot point
out how q measure should be framed
to avoid conflict with the organic
law.
Both houses of Congress today
spend a great deal OF time in an
almost futile argument OF constitu-
tional question:, says Mr.. Anderson.
After the argument has been com
pleted and the bill has been passed,
and even after the act has been
enforced for some months or years,
the Supreme Court may by per
tectly proper decision declare that
the entire action was illegal.
Not Coed Teamwork.
THE waste of time and public
money involved in such proceeding
must he obvious to every one. Pub
lie hopes may be raised very high
and held high for some time only TO
be dashed to the ground some months
or years later by Supreme Court
decision This certainly is not good
teamwork in government 1t is not
necessary and is perhaps not desira-
ble to take from the Supreme Court
the power to pass upon questions of
constitutionality. 1t might we'll how
ever, be given the power to advise
Congress upon constitutional Ques-
tions and also to assist in drafting
constitutional amepdments to over
come difficulties in the enactment of
laws"
To carry out the idea of the gen
tleman from Minnesota it would be
necessary, of course, to amend the
Constitution somewhat as follows:
By joint resolution passed by a ma
jority of the members of both houses
and approved by the President the
Congress shall have power to sub
nit to the Supreme Court any pro-
posed bill, with the request that said
court certify to Congress it's opinion
upon the constitutionality of said bill
IL enacted into law. The Supreme
Court shall without undue delay GER
tify to the respective houses of Con
gress its opinion as to the constitu-
tionality of such proposed measure,
together with its reasons for hoiding &
such opinion. In case the court be OF
opinion that the bill in question would
be Unconstitutional if enacted. 1T
shall submit with it's reply a draft
of proposed amendment to the
Constitution with a certificate saying
that in the opinion Of the members
of the court such arpendment if
made a part of the Constitution.
would obviate the constitutional OBJ
jections to the proposed measure.
Further Provisions.
A further amendment outlined by
Mr.. Anderson would cover the situ-
alton arising when the Supreme Court
has definitely declared a law to be
unconstitutional He would also pro-
vide for argument before the Supreme
Court by members Of the judiciary
committees of both the House and the
Senate, and for the presentation of
briefs by interested parties for the
enlightment of the court in questions
presented to 1t.
Whether an advance opinion by the
Supreme Court that proposed law
is constitutional would make it such
or whether the court would have to
do double duty and pass upon legis-
lation both before and after it's pas-
sage, is not explained by the pro-
ponent of the new plan. Neither is it
made clear just how the court could
be expected to dispose of the vast
amount of additional work involved
and still pass upon all the other cases
that come to it.
GUS proposals for tinkering with the
powers and duties of the great
judicial tribunal will be found in
the end TO be arguments for letting
Well enough alone