Evening star., 1938-08-29
Maryland Voter Questions
Lewis Views on Court.

To the Editor OF The Star:
A S A citizen of Maryland who voted
for the election of President Roose-
welt both in 1882 and 1886, I should like
to make some observations upon the
present senatorial primary situation in
Maryland.
1t is conceded that the proposers and
supporters of certain legislation which
the past two or three years are deter
mined that those members of Congress
who opposed such legislation shall not
be returned to the National Legislature.
The most conspicuous issue between the
President and his followers and the So
called Tory" Democrats is that raised
by the Supreme Court bill: and upon
this issue Senator Millard Tydings and
Congressman David Lewis sharply diff
fered. Senator TEdings refused to give
his approval to the measure, for reasons
which have been ably and often pre-
sented to the public by various members
Of the Senate. Congressman Lewis on
the other hand, was warm supporter OF
the court bill. In 1885 he delivered a
speech in Congress against the power of
judicial review.
Mr.. Lewis believes that "a private liti-
CANT" has no right to dispute in court
the constitutional validity of Federal
legislation because Cd such dispute Is
only an attempt to evade the obliga-
tions placed upon the individual by the
law; and (2) because Congress itself is
the best Judge as to the constitutionality
of the laws it passes; and that passage
of law by Congress Is warrant, ipso
facto, OF its validity. Mr.. Lewis implies
that II the people disagree with the
Judgment of Congress as to legislation,
they may, through the congressional
elections. repudiate their representatives
and replace them with those who will
carry out their mandate.
In the first place, every challenge by
an individual in court Of any law, wheth-
er Federal or State civil or criminal, is
an attempt to evade the obligation i'm
posed by that law. In the case of Fed
eral legislation, the Federal court is
called upon to decide whether such OBJ
legation invades the immunities pos
sessed by every citizen of the United
States, and Of the States individually,
under the provisions of the Constitution.
Those provisions were drawn up to pro-
tect the individual, whether rich Or poor,
from oppression by the politically power
full: and it is the function of the courts
to stand between the individual and the
unrestrained application of any and
every legislative decree drawn up by
Congress on its own initiative or under
compulsion from the Executive. The
courts are the bulWark between the peo-
pie and oppression by those in power.
The events leading up to the American
Revolution painfully demonstrated to
the fathers of the Constitution that
there must be protection and redress for
individuals against injustice and oppres-
sion by governments. They provided
them in the Federal judicial system.
Under Mr.. Lewis reasoning, any law
passed by Congress would be constitu-
tional and binding upon the people until
a Congress had been reelected which
would repeal that law. Without going
into the soundness of congressional judg-
ment on constitutional questions, let us
consider the above statement as it ap-
plies to the present situation in Mary
land. Senator Tydings has voted no"
on many New Deal measures. He now
stands before the people for reelection,
and without apology has produced his
record in the Senate. He frankly states
that he has voted according to his own
good judgment and for the welfare of
the country as he sees it. But are the
people of Maryland allowed to exercise
their judgment freely as to whom they
shall send to Congress? They are being
bribed with w. P. A. funds, Federal job
holders are being intimidated, and the
people generally browbeaten into voting
for the man chosen by the President Of
the United States to represent the free
State of Maryland. The New Dealers
are doing everything in their power to
achieve their ends by exercising COM
plete control not only Of every branch
Of the Federal Qoyernment, but Of func.