The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1937-01-14
LET THE COURT BE GUIDED
BY LAW NOT BY ELEC-
TON RETURNS

Vened, Senator Robinson, the Hoor
leader of the majority party, expressed
the belief that it would be necessary
to amend the constitution in order to
1egahze or make effective, proposed
new legislation. Since several acts of
former congresses, notably the MIRA
and the AAA were declared unconsti-
tutional by the Supreme Court, there
have been many suggestions that the
constitution should be changed in
order to let the country have the bene-
fit of these new laws that were invali-
dated under the constitution as it now
stands.
A great portion of the country there
fore seemed ready to accept the fore
cast of Senator Robinson that an
amendment to the constitution would
be submitted. The message of Presi-
dent Roosevelt on Wednesday changed
all this. The President doesn't advise
that the constitution be amended. He
says:
''The vital need is not alteration of
our fundamental law, but an increas-
ingly enlightened view with reference
to it. ="
The President did not mention the
Supreme Court, but the section of his
message dealing with this subject
made the fact quite plain that he ex-
pected the Supreme Court to modify
its Interpretation of the fundamental
law. This is SO apparent that Asso-
ciated Press correspondents stated
that sources in touch with the Presi-
dent understood it would be the Roose-
veltian policy in his second administra-
tion to give the Supreme Court and
business an opportunity to follow the
election returns and guide his course
by the results"
It is all right to expect business to be
guided by elections" not the Su-
preme Court. The Court is one insti-
tuition that should be guided by the
law. And by the law as it is and not
as even the judges may wish it to be
or as election returns may, at the
moment, indicate the majority of the
people want it to be. The Supreme
Court does not give decisions on the
wisdom, the popularity, or the exped-
1ency of an act of Congress. The
Court merely deeds whether the act
OF the legislators is in accord with
the fundamental law as that law now
stands. It is not the business of the
Supreme Court, or any other court, to
look to election returns for guidance.
If the necessities, the wishes and de-
sires of the people of the country have
so changed that they now want the
Congress given power to enact legis-
lation now prohibited by the consti-
tuition, the proper procedure, and, we
hold, the only safe procedure, is for
the President and Congress to give
the people an opportunity to change
the constitution by the submission of
an amendment in the way the funda-
mental law provides. The final cleo
ton returns on constitutional amend
ment will be, eventually, a mandate
upon the Supreme Court, not merely
a guide.
The constitution has been changed
by amendment many times and can be
again without any upheaval or dis
order and without compromising the
Supreme Court. The constitution was
amended to get rid of slavery. It was
amended to legalize the income tax; to
have senator's elected by direct vote;
to prohibit the manufacture of intoxi-
eating beverages; to provide for wom-
en- voting; to begin sessions of Con-
gress and inaugurate presidents in
January instead of March, and to re.
peal the amendment forbidding the
manufacture Of Intoxicating bever-
ages.
Before some of these constitutional
changes were made election returns
indicated plainly that the majority Of
the voters of the country favored the
change. This was notably true in the
cases of the 10 and 81 amendments
the one enacting prohibition and the
other one repeating prohibition. Nc
one even heard of calling upon the
Supreme Court to change it's interpre.
tation of the fundamental law be.
cause the election returns indicated
the majority of the voters wanted g
change. Congress and the President
gave the people an opportunity tt