Evening star., 1935-10-28
u. s. LOSES MOVE
AS DEC. 9 IS SET.
|FOR A.A.A. HEARING
Supreme Court Decides to
Review Decision on SIum
Clearance.
EARLY DATE REQUEST
OF REED is REFUSED
Ultimate Ruling on Low-Cost
Housing Will Affect AZ Prof.
ects in Country.
BY JOHN H. CLINE.

The Government today lost its rrst
Supreme Court Skirmish in the A. A.
A. suit-most important of the New
Deal acts awaiting constitutional re-
view-when the high tribunal set the
case for hearing on December 9.
At the same time the court decided
to review the conStitutionality of the
Governments slum clearance and low
cost housing program.
Solicitor General Stanley Reed had
asked that the A. A. A. case, involving
the conStitutionality of processing
taxes, to pay benefits to farmers, be
set for argument about November 20
A hearing on that date, it had been
pointed out, would have made probable
a decision before the return Of Con-
gress. Then, if present taxes should
De ruled out, the Government would
have been in position to propose new
taxes to pay the benefits granted farm
ers participating in crop reduction
programs.
Counsel for the Hoosac Mills OF
Massachusetts, had urged, however,
that the case be set for argument not
sooner than December 9, and this re-
quest was granted by the court.
A. A. A. Important Issue.
The A. A. A. program, under which
thousands of benefit checks already
have been sent to farmers over the
country. is of the utmost Importance
politically to the administration and
is expected to play a vital part in
the 1886 national elections. The
processing taxes have been declared
unconstitutional by the lower courts
and the Government is marshaling
all its forces to secure a reversal OF
the unfavorable ruling.
The decision to review the slum
standing importance to the Roosevelt
administration. The ultimate ruling
will affect Al projects throughout the
country which are being financed with
s133, 900, 900 of P. w. A. funds.
U. S. Authority Involved.
The question involved is whether
the Government has a right to con-
denim land for slum clearance and
low-cost housing undertakings. The
case now before the Supreme Court
arose out of suit in Louisville, where
the United States Circuit Court OF
Appeals decided the Government has
no authority under the Constitution
to condemn private property for such
purposes.
The owners Of the land contend
this Is not taking of their property
for a public use within the meaning
Of the Constitution.
In asking the Supreme Court to re-
view the lower court ruling. Solicitor
General Reed contended the United
States may take property by emf
nent domain whenever it is necessary
or appropriate to do so in the execu.
ton of any of the powers granted il
by the Constitution"
He added number of projects hac
been selected for the purpose oi
making an initial attack upon a con-
dition which is prolific source o.
Nationwide disease, crime and i'm.
morality and presents a grave prob
lem to the Federal Government"
Thirteen housing projects actually
under construction are threatened ii
the suit. The Government attempted
to condemn land in Southwest Wash.
Ington for one project, but the under
taking was abandoned after the own
ers of the property filed suit for an in
junction, basing their action on the
Kentucky decision.
After the Louisville ruling the Gov
(See COURT, Page 81