Evening star., 1936-03-01
SUPREME COURT
WILL RECONvENE
SIum Clearance, S. E. C.. and
' Guffey Coal Act on
Docket Tomorrow.
BY REX COLLIER.


spelp' granted by the Supreme Court
since the T. v. A. decision, Depart
ment of Justice legal experts have
entrenched themselves for q Iast-ditch
campaign in defense of the constitu-
tionality Of other contested New Deal
laws.
With the reconvening tomorrow of
the Supreme Court after q two-week
recess, the Government is ready to
put up q series of battles in rapid
succession In behalf Of the slum clear
ance program. the Securities and Ex-
change Commission and the Guffey
coal act case.
Decisions in all three of these cases
are anticipated before adjournment
late in May or early June, with the
likelihood that argument of a fourth
crucial suit-the National Labor Re-
lations Board case-will be deferred
until the next term of court.
Railroad Act Pressed.
Heading toward the Supreme Court
is the railroad retirement act, consti-
tutionality Of which has been con-
tested by 1875 railroads in q Joint
action brought in the District Supreme
Court. The social security act will
not come before the court this session.
Encouraged by the high courts
ruling in the Tennessee Valley Author
ity case. Government attorneys have
been concentrating on perfecting their
defense in the suits brought by Ken
lucky and Michigan interests against
the slum clearance program.
This consolidated case Is on the
docket to be heard with reopening of
the court tomorrow. Assistant Attor-
ney General John Dickinson, drafted"
from the Department of Commerce
recently to bolster depleted legal ranks
Of the Justice Department due to nu-
merous designations, will make his
Justice Department debut in a major
case when he argues the slum clear
ance suit.
Dickinson also will lead the fight
for the Guffey coal act when argu-
ments open about March IL.
S, E. C. Case Due March 8.
The court Is expected to hear the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(act Of 1889 case on March 9. :.
The slum clearance case first
reached the Supreme Court as a re-
suit of suit brought originally in
the western district of Kentucky,
where Judge Dawson held that mo
power resides in the National Govern
ment to condemn the property herein
involved for the purpose for which it
is intended" and the Circuit Court
OF Appeals for the sixth circuit az
firmed the lower courts ruling.
The administrations far-flung slum
clearance program hangs in the
courts balance in this case.
With the slum clearance argu-
ments out Of the way, the path will be
clear for the case of j. Edward Jones
versus the Securities and Exchange
Commission. The latter required
registration by Jones of an issue of oil
royalty certificates in New York. The
commission was upheld by the Dis
trict Court and Circuit Court of Ap-
peals.
Jones will seek to show the high
tribunal that the registration require
ments of the securities act of 1898
deprive him of liberty" without due
process Of law. Government lawyers
will counter with carefully prepared
arguments defending the act, and
pointing to action of the court in up
holding "blue sky" laws in the past.
Coal Suits Joint Actions.
Two suits challenging validity of
the Guffey coal act otherwise known
as the bituminous coal conservation
act of 1885, will be considered jointly
by the Supreme Court. They are the
Carter Coal Co. case, filed by James
Walter Carter Of Stevenson, Md,
which came through the District Su.
preme Court, and the Louisville, KY.
suit, filed by 16 coal companies against
the collector Of internal revenue for
Kentucky.
The coal firms claim that the code
imposed under the Guffey act would
result in confiscation of their prop
erty. Taxes sought under the act are
characterized as Uncomfortable"
Constitutionality Of the Wagner act,
creating the National Labor Relations
Board, has been challenged in "a cases
filed In the district courts. Out OF |
13 cases decided there, eight decisions
have been favorable to the Govern
ment. All of these suits seek to
enjoin the board from holding hear
ings in labor cases brought before 1t.
Two Of these cases have reached the
Circuit Courts-the Greyhound case
in the Third Judicial Circuit and the
Trailer case In the Sixth Cir
cult. The Government contends the
courts have no right to enjoin the
board from holding hearings.