Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-05-30

The press applauds the decision of
the Supreme Court of the United States
that CALIFORNIA; "red-fiag law is I'M
constitutional and interprets it as an
assurance to the people Of the right OF
free speech and free political discus
sion while letting down no bars TO the
use Of force or violence. The decision
is seen to have far more significance
than the freeing of Yetta Stromberg,
whose conviction 1t set aside.
The San Francisco Chronicle out
lines the defective clause as follows !:
This California law, under which the
Yetta Stromberg case has attracted so
much attention throughout the Nation,
makes it a felony to display red nag
% as a symbol or employment o.
opposition to organized government
90 as an invitation or stimulus 70
anarchistic actions, (O as an AID 10
nrops panda.'" and explains that 1.-The
first was held by the Supreme Court
to be too broad a description and In.
valid, since it makes no exception OF
legal ferns of opposition" the
Chronicle further remarks: The RED
flag law itself Is quite likely piece OF
overanxiety on the part of its makers
It lends an undue Importance TO a
few wild-eyed radicals, who are really
too few in this country to count. Anu
it does nothing to stop the propaganoa
at which it Is aimed. Without the use
of fag-red, yellow or purpieLl9e,M ,e
Stromberg or any one else coulo m
struct children in Communist doc
trines." ~ :,
Quoting Chief Justice Hughes as
having said in his decision that tine
maintenance of an opportunity LOT
free political discussion to the end that
Government may be responsive 10 tne
will of the people and that changes
may be obtained by lawful means. an
opportunity essential to the security
of the republic, Is fundamentai pin, pr ;,
ciple Of our constitutional sys..
THE YOUNGSTOWN Vindicatcr approves
this announcement and says, 1T mas
always been a principle Of our Gov
eminent that the people have right
IN change 1t If they desired, ano 10
keen it responsive to their Will, Tree
discussion is essential"
4 \
"T utterly abllor what you say Vol
taire once wrote to Helvetius, whose
opinions were about to cause him to go
to Jail. but shall defend to the oeatn
your right to say it," quotes the Cnat-
tanooga News, following with the re-
mark, "A salutary attitude LOT amer
cans to take" and contending tine
Comnn,Inist menace cannot be combat
ed by depriving those few American
citizens who have leaning toward the
plans of Soviet Russia OF their freedom
of speech, right guaranteed them by
our Constitution. The decision OF the
Nations high tribunal in the California
case is further assurance that speech
remains free"
AS the Lincoln state Journal puts 1t.
1.-The Supreme Court holds the law de-
fective in that it interferes with free
political thought and discussion. FER
haps the ideas do not correspond Win
those held by the majority OF the citi-
zens Of the United States. That does
not make it illegal to hold such
thoughts. The Constitution was de-
signed to protect this minority"
Suppression Of criticism Of the Gov
eminent would, in the end, prove a
more serious threat to American free
dom than to permit discussion and de-
nunciation," declares the Omaha World
Herald. which considers that If there
is not to be freedom Of speech in the
United states, then democracy Is fail
ing" The Cleveland News says: "As far
as America has been able to determine,
Communism, alien theory OF govern
n1ent, is opposed to all the traditions
and purposes of free people. This
country wants none OF 1t. ana mas mace
determined efforts to combat it. In
doing so, however. the greatest care
should be taken not to infringe on the
rights of the people to criticize their
Government freely, to debate public af-
fairs. to remedy faults in the Govern
n1ent, to GUST corrupt officials"
"The Hughes decision. interpreted for
the benefit Of laynen. is said to mean
that Californians who display the red