The Western news. [volume] (Libby, Mont.) 1933-current, 1937-04-29
The
SUPREME
COURT
. AND HOW
l. TT WORKS
The Viii of the People
nv ROBERT MERRILL

L interpret the will of the peo-
pie as expressed in their basic
law-the Constitution.
But the task Is not always an
easy one. Sometimes the members
of the court themselves are not IN
accord. Sometimes critics OUTSIDE
the court disagree with its innings.
That is only natural.
Consider, for example, three OF our
outstanding constitutional rights
Trial by jury, immunity from UNI
reasonable search, and prohipition
upon the taking Of life. liberty OF
property without due process OF law.
The language of the Constitution
as to the first OF these Is very clear.
as to the second 1t is less clear, and
in the case of the third It i stu
more vague.
Defining Our Rights.
Since the function OF the Supreme
court Il to protect the individual
citizen against the invasion OF ms
constitutional rights, the task o.
the court b easiest when, In the
Constitution, tia will Of the people
has been clearly expressed Thus =
federal statute authorizing = Judge
to dismiss the jury In = criminal
case and himself pronounce the de-
PENDANT guilty would be larry
clear violation OF the provision that
the trial Of all crimes shall be BY
jury.
In case OF q warrant to search
citizens house, there might be plen-
ty Of room for difference OF opinion
whether the attempted search was
or was not unreasonable.
Finally, when the citizen COM
plains merely that the congress Is
proposing to deprive him OF liberty
or property without giving him
square deal, the court has the DIM
cult task OF determining, upon the
facts OF his case. whether or not
his complaint is well founded.
In all three cases. however. It Is
important to remember that the Ian
Ruage OF the Constitution Is not the
courts language, but the peoples.
As is stated In its Preamble. we.
the people, wrote the Constitution.
: As was also provided in the original
. draft, we, the people, can change
its language or provisions. We have,
In fact, done 30 many times. through
!. the process OF amendment. And
when we make such changes the
. Supreme court has no choice but to
!. apply, to any case. the rules which
: the people have written.
. The Case Of Mrs. Minor.
The Equal Suffrage Amendment
! offers an interesting illustration Of
t this.
Let's 70 back into bit Of general
It " forgotten history for an illustra.
k ton:
Z In 1871 Mrs. Virginia Minor, o.
/. Missouri. was denied the privilege d
d registering Is ! voter In that state
d She insisted that she had the righ'
Z 70 vote, and brought suit against TN
k officer who would not let hel
- register.
He held that the constitution an<
y laws OF Missouri provided that 'Ev
IS cry male citizen OF the United State1
"a shall be entitled to vote" Mrs. MI
4. nor replied that denying her tn
4 vote was 3 violation OF her rights o
d, citizenship under the United State
Constitution, and therefore the Pre-
visions OF the constitution and law
OF Missouri were In this case void
The appeal went to the Unite
y States Supreme court.
~ After hearing both sides II Dc
as cided unanimously that while won
? en- had always been considered ci
40 liens, nevertheless the right to vo<
&c had not been mode one Of the pr,
o ileees OF 4 citizen by the Unite
ol States Constitution, and that Ii
1e 18th Amendment to the Constitute
IL. did not add the right Of suffrage
at the privileges and inmunities I
ay citizenship n they existed ut Il
eu time Of its adoption.
Amendment Clears Situation.
~ "If the law Is wrong" held Il
;. court, sit ought to be changed: b
A. the power for that Ii not with us
It held further that under the Uni
,;~ ed States Constitution. "the cons
he tutions and laws of the sever
states which commit that importal
- trust to men alone are not nece
ins sarily void"
rst Today that situation Is changed
nt. because the people decided tn
A. women should have the right to vo
,~v and said 50 clearly In the IS
IN Amendment, adopted In 1870.
nd Emphatically they asserted: SET
m right OF citizens Of the United Stat
Mt to vote shall not be denied
ow- abridged by the United States or
,x;e any state on account OF sex"
he'd Since 1920 any law which depriv
raw : woman OF the right to vote wot
clearly be unconstitutional, and
/, : Supreme court would 70 declal
he what had formerly not existed
hat 4 right was made right by the p
w." ole, by changing the rules.
D western Newspaper Unie~-
A"~A
W Free Bread Since 1854
4 u