Evening star., 1937-03-10


saying that they 7ere all the powers
needed to meet each and every
problem which then had national
character and which could not be
met by merely local action.
Gave Congress Power
For General Welfare Of Nation.
But the trainers went further.
Having in mind that in succeeding
generations many other problems
then undreamed of would become
national problems, they gave to the
Congress the ample broad powers
to levy taxes - and provide for
the common defense and general
welfare of the United States"
That, my friends, is what
honestly believe to have been the
clear and underlying purpose of the
patriots who wrote a Federal Con-
stltution to create national gov
eminent with national power, in
tended, as they said ito form a
more perfect union for our
serves and our pOSterlty."
For nearly 20 years there was no
conflict between the Congress and
the court. Then. in 1903, Congress
passed statute which the court
said violated an express provision
OF the Constitution. The court
claimed the power to declare it un-
constitutional and did so declare it.
But little later the court admitted
that 1t was an extraordinary power
to exercise and through Mr.. Justice
Washington laid down this limita-
ton upon it: 1T is but a decent
respect due to the wisdom, the in
tegrlty and the patriotism of the
legislative body, by which any law
is passed, to presume in favor of
Its validity until its violation of the
Constitution is proved beyond all
reasonable doubt"
But since the rise of the modern
movement for social and economic
progress through legislation. the
court has more and more often
and more and more boldly asserted
power to veto avs passed by the
congress and State Legislatures In
complete disregard of this original
limitation.
Court Becomes Body
That Makes Policies.
In the last four years the sound
rule OF giving statutes the benefit
OF all reasonable doubt has been
cast aside. The court has been act
Ing not as judicial body, but as
pollcy-making body.
When the Congress has sought to
stabilize national agriculture, to
improve the conditions of labor, to
safeguard business against unfair
competition, to protect our national
resources, and in many other ways
10 serve our clearly national needs.
the ajority of the court has been
assuming the power to pass on the
wisdom OF these acts of the Con-
greSs-and to approve or disapproye
the public policy written into these
laws.
Ihat is not only my accusation.
IL is the accusation of most distin-
gulshed justices of the present Su.
preme Court. I have not the time
10 quote to you all the language
used by dissenting justices in MANY
OF THESE cases. But in the case
holding the railroad retirement act
unconstitutional, for instance, Chief
Justice Hughes said In a dissenting
OPINION that the majority opinion
was "a departure from sound prin-
ciples," and placed IAN unwarrant--
ed limitation upon the commerce
clause" And three other justices
agreed with him.
In the case holding the A. A. A.
unconstitutional, Justice Stone said
OF the majority opinion that it was
tortured construction of tho
Constitution" And two other ius-
tices agreed with him.
In the case holding the New York
minimum wage law unconstitu-
tional, Justice Stone said that the
majority were actually reading into
the Constitution their own per-
sonal economic predictions" and
that II the legislative power is not
left free to choose the methods of
solving the problems of poverty,
subsistence and health of large
numbers in the community, then
government is to be rendered i'm
potent" And two other justices
agreed with him.
In the face of these dissenting
opinions, there is no basis for the
claim made by some members of
the court that something In the
Constitution has compelled them
regretfully to thwart the will of
the people.
Has Set Itself Up
As Super-Legislature.
In the face of such dissenting
opinions, it is perfectly clear that
as Chief Justice Hughes has said:
''We are under a Constitution, but
the Constitution is what the judges
say it is
The court, in addition to the
proper use of its judicial functions,
has improperly set itself up as the
third house Of the Congress-
super Legislature, as one of the
justices has called threading into
the Constitution words and implica-
tions which are not there and
which were never intended to be
there.
We have, therefore, reached the
point as a Nation where we must
take action to save the Constitution
from the court and the court from
itself. We must find way to take
an appeal from the Supreme Court
to the Constitution itself. We want
a Supreme Court which will do
justice under the Constitution-not