The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1936-02-13
THURSDAY. FEBRUARY 10.
THE REAL ISSUE
a scRIPrs-HowARD NEwsPAPER

THE REAL ISSUE
W1TH his special genius for clearing aside col
V lateral matters and getting at the heart of
problem Senator George Norris yesterday turned the
Senate debate away from quiboles about how the
substitute AAA measure should be written.
He centered attention on the real issue-the power
OF the Supreme Court to upset the law after it is
enacted regardless of its wording. And what he said
applies alike to other acts of Congress.
AS TO agriculture-the problem which has plagued
every national Administration since the World War
Harding Coolidge, Hoover, well as Roosevelt-he
warned that the problem must be solved if the coun
try IS to live and prosper.
He said in effect that the national government
had reached staemate; that Congress knew certain
economic and social reforms necessary to con-
tinuance of the republic but could not act with any
feeling of confidence because of fear of court Veto
Therefore, he reasoned. the logical thing for Con-
gress tc do is to exercise its constitutional authority
in the matter of the judiciary.
The particular method he proposed calls for
legislative stipulation that act of Congress may
be invaidated except by unanimous vote of the SUI
preme Court. There have been other proposals to
curb the courts most of them calling for consttu-
tional amendments which the Senator believes i'm
practicable.
He bases his proposal that part of the Con-
stitution which says The Supreme Court shall have
appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with
such exceptions and under such regulations the
Congress shall make"
AS laymen. we find no legal flaws in his plan.
Maybe there some If so, they should be brought
forward The issue is there, and can not be shushed
away.
- jorty of the Congress and preponderance of
the people of the country may law. But if
five of the nine justices of the Supreme Court don't
like the law, it goes out the window. One man can
hold control
The Norris plan would end these divided opinions
which have plagued the court.
1t is interesting to how this would have
worked in recent cases. The MIRA would have fallen
anyway because all nine justices agreed it was
illegal So would the old Frazer-Lemke farm mort
gage moratorium law. Mondays Louisiana free press
decision. affecting state law, likewise was
unanimous
The AAA decision would have been upheld, be-
cause in that case three justices dssented The rail-
way retirement law which knocked out on
5-4 decision, would have been sustained. And there
would have been the same difference in respect to
those two setbacks civil hberes-the 54 decisions
in the Bland Macintosh oath to-bear-arms case
and the prohibition wire-t tapping case.
ON basis of the majority opinion in the AAA
~ case it is possible that the justices themselves
might not oppose such unanimity. requirement.
For the majority Mr.. Justice Roberts said;
Every presumption is to be INDUCED in favor
of faithful compliance by Congress with the man.
dates of the fundamental law. Courts reluctant
to adjudge any statute in contravention of them.
When such contention comes here we nat
urally require showing that by no reasonable pos
sbility the challenged legislation fall within the
wide range of discretion permitted to the Congress"
Yet in this case there was so much of a "rea-
sonahe possibility" that three Supreme Court justices
disagreed with the six others. unanimous agree
niens therefore, might seem logical requirement
to dspel reasonable doubts.
Such solution as Mr. Norris proposes might in
fact forever quiet the issue of Supreme power
to declare laws unconstitutional for it is certain
that public sentiment would sustain the court in
any Judgment wherein all justices agree.
The Norris plan therefore not be attacked as
an effort to abolish the court wreck the Consti
tuition The effect might very well be to strengthen
the court in public esteem.
THERE are other ways we'll as this TO get this
n issue before the people. And the sooner that is
done the better principle vital to self-govern-
ment is at stake, And method should be
worked out to permit the people to decide. For in
democracy the people, not the courts not Congress-
not the President, the source of all power 1t
may be that a majority do not want to change the
present system, We do not know.
But it is time to stop pussyfooting and to give
the people chance to come to grips with the ques-
ton.