The Washington times., 1936-01-11
More Attacks
, On Supreme
Court
By James T. Williams, Jr.

It will not be possible for the
Administration to dodge much
longer the grave issues which it
has raised by incubating dissat-
isfaction with the position that
the Supreme Court Of the United
States holds under the American
system of government.
Radical supporters Of the AdS
miniStration in and out of Con
gress continue to attack THE
power of the court to pass upbr
the constitutionality of an act
of Congress in a case brought
before the court in which iciti-
zen claims the courts protection.
Proposals are pending in fboth
Houses of Congress to take away
this power in whole or in lpart.
Upon these proposals thes Ad-
ministration has thus far main
tained in public complete silence.
But more than one member of
the Administration has h{inted
that the President was not wholly
satisfied with the existing Isitua-
tion.
Whether they spoke with Mr..
Roosevelt's authority has yet to
be announced.
That announcement canAot be
delayed much longer.
Mr.. Roosevelt will be compelled,
before his appeal to the American
people to give him another term
is pressed much further,E to say
whether he wishes to deprive the
Court of its powers under the
Constitution.
CLEARLY DEFINE I'D
Under the American $ ystem of
government the position of the
Supreme Court has be- I'm clearly
defined by a distinguished jurist,
Democrat and a political and
personal supporter of MIR. Roose-
velt, in a recent book which de-
serves the wide reading it is get
ting. This book, Con gress, the
Constitution and the Supreme
Court" was recently revised by it's
authcS. Mr.. Charles Warren of
Massachusetts, and brought up to
date.
In one chapter Mr.. Warren dis
cuSSes the proposal, which is again
agitated, to make q congress the
supreme and final Judge Of its
own powers.
Before disposing of this absurd
suggestion, Mr.. WARREN thus clari.
fles the position of the Court un-
der the American system:
ut has been poi nted out that
the function of (the Supreme
Court in holding an act of Con-
greSS invalid was a necessary
judicial functiOn that a court
with such a power was embOd-
led in the Constitution because .
the trainers alEteady had been
familiar, by actual experience,
with the value.i of their State
courts in curbi ing judicial deci-
sion exceSses in the use Of power
and violations of their State con-
StitutiOnS by S tate legislatures;
that the fram8rS expected and
intended that the Supreme
Court should exercise similar
power; that tH He general public
and those who ratified the Con-
StitutiOn had the same expecta-
tiOnS and intentions as the
court; that the radicals of 1888,
who secured tn e insertion of the
Bill of Rights fntO the COnstitu.
ton understood that it would be
a useless action unless such Bill
of Rights cOuAd be enforced by
a court; andI finally that the
early Congresses themselves, for
IL years, Recognized and en-
dOrsed the existence of this
power Of tho court, with hardly
a dissenting vote"
WHICH SIDE?
In spite of this record, radical
and other disgruntled elements
when dissatisfied with a decision
of the Supreme Court have on
more than ,one occasion IN the
past attacked the power of the
Court to hold an act of Congress
unconstituti9 9nal.
This alta ack was revived las
May when the Supreme Cour
held the MIRA unconstitutional
It will doubtless continue al
the present session of Congress
now that the Supreme Court hal
held the AAA unconstitutional
What the American people vii
IlsiSt upon knowing before the!
give him another term in tn.
White House is whether Mr.
Roosevelt agrees to the definition
of the functions of the Supreme
Court drawn by Mr.. Warren from
the record, or whether he side.
, with the radicals in demandinl
that these powers be taken away
from the Court.
The American people have
right to this information because
. the next President-be it MI
Roosevelt, Senator Borah or Gov
ernor Landon or another-proba
bly, will be called upon to appoin
four or maybe a majority of tn
members of the Supreme Court