Evening star., 1937-01-20
The Supreme Court.

Many doctors are ready to operate on
the Supreme Court of the United States.
They range from members of Congress
to leaders of labor and farm organiza-
tions. The President of the United
States has urged that something must
Interpretation of the Constitution by the
court, In the light of changed conditions
in American economy and American life.
A difference of opinion exists whether
the Constitution itself shall be amended,
granting to Congress additional powers
to legislate regarding social and eco
nomic questions or the Supreme Courts
powers to declare acts of Congress un-
constitutional shall be abridged.
If current reports be true, the Presi-
dent is planning a conference with
members of the House and Senate, with
officials Of the Department of Justice
and with others interested in this i'm
Norris of Nebraska has consented to
head an informal committee to study
the matter and perhaps to draft legisla-
ton. No one has yet suggested that the
Supreme Court be called in to give its
advice.
A constitutional amendment would be
the most direct method Of dealing with
the problem. The President, who is
looked to for leadership in the tangle
Of diverse opinions, said in his address
to Congress at the opening of the present
session he saw no need for constitutional
amendment. This, however, is not the
view taken by some of the Democratic
leaders on Capitol Hill.
The demand that the powers of the
Supreme Court be curtailed comes from
those who are disgruntled because of its
decisions invalidating certain New Deal
legislative acts. Once the powers of the
court have been curtailed, however, no
one can foresee to what extent this
limitation on the independence of the
courts may go. Other Congresses and
other Presidents may make demands and
put through legislation that may prove
disastrous. The liberties of the people,
so long a boast of America, may be en-
dangered in a very real manner.
One Of the most common demands Is
that the Supreme Court be restricted In
declaring acts of Congress unconstitu-
tional. It is proposed that the court may
invalidate an act only by decision in
which six of the nine Of the justices
concur in such a decision, or even that
seven must concur. This does violence
to the majority rule which runs through
out the philosophy of American Gov
ernment. 1t would have the effect of
permitting a minority of the court to
declare an act of Congress constitutional,
and perhaps small minority. There
are two obvious departures from the
majority rule in American Government.
The first occurs within the Constitution
itself, when 1t provides that constitu-
tional amendment must be submitted to
the States by two-thirds vote of each
OF the two houses of Congress and that
such proposed amendment can become
part Of the Constitution only when rati-
fed by three-fourths of the States. The
second is found in the provision that
treaties with foreign nations must be
ratified by a two-thirds vote of the
Senate.
There is nothing. however, which
hitherto has been attempted to set the
power of the legislative and executive
branches Of the Government over and
above the judicial branch in the manner
now suggested. Once that has been
done Legislature, ruled by the desires
or the passions Of the moment, may over
ride at will the true provisions of the
Constitution and its guarantees to Ameri-
can citizens. The Supreme Court on
many occasions has been the defender
Of the citizen in times of stress, de-
fender of the poor and of the minority.