Evening star., 1938-06-05

lowing procedure outlined by the court
He also said that in view of his previous
connection with the case and his statements
regarding it, he had decided to give the
commission men an opportunity to make
their arguments before some other Official
Of his department.
In any event it should be apparent that
the court, while it has adopted decidedly
liberal attitude since the fight over the
Presidents judiciary bill. Is not yet ready
to abdicate in the face of criticism or
what might more properly be called abuse
from those high in the councils of the
administration
At the same time, however, the record of
the 1937-38 term should remove any doubts
as to the permanency Of the tribunals lib
eral outlook When decisions upholding
New Deal laws were returned during the
thick of the fight over the bill to enlarge
the court, many of the Presidents advisers,
If not the President himself, believed the
justices had adopted a liberal stand as q
matter Of expediency and would swing back
to the conservative side when the legisla-
bA~AA WoS O0ACAy 0at VA bAlS way
The most convincing refutation of that
view is the record made by the Labor Board
before the court during the last term. The
court decided seven cases involving pro-
ceedings under the Labor Relations Act
and all Of the decisions were favorable to
the board despite the fact that they were
bitterly fought by industrial interests and
some Of them, at least, presented questions
which might have been decided against
the board without affecting the validity of
the act itself. Had the court been disposed
to seize upon technical excuses to rule
against New Deal agencies it could not have
had better opportunity than in the
Mackay case.
Board Wins Another Victory.
1t is also worthy Of note that an eighth
victory was won by the board when the
court at its final session ruled the Third
Circuit Court did not have Jurisdiction to
prevent the board from reopening its case
against the Republic Steel Corp. The Re-
public case was one Of those the board
desired to reopen in view Of the decision in
pAAS xAoA4odo AiVy CUu64OfCISy, UUv Lllc VlTs
cult Court refused to permit that action.
Thereupon the board appealed to the su-
preme Court and won.
In all, the justices upheld the New Deal
in IA cases.
Perhaps the most important of these in
yolved the legality Of the registration pro-
visions Of the Public Utility Holding Com
pany Act, which played large part in the
Presidents campaign for business reform.
In other rulings which came as just as
great blow to the utilities, the court re-
fused to permit them to challenge the
validity Of loans and grants by the Public
Works Administration to municipalities for
the construction OF municipally-owned
power systems.
Another highly important DEVELOPMENT
during the term were number of decisions
broadening the taxing power of both Fed
eral and State governments. Outstanding
among these was the ruling In the New
York Port Authority case in which the
majority, according to dissenting opinion
by Justices Butler and McReynolds over
ruled q century Of precedents. The deci-
sion did not 60 all the way in eliminating
tax-exempt securities and salaries, as
urged by the President, but it was .
long step in that direction.
Odd Tapping Case Angle.
A rather curious situation has arisen in
connection with the courts ruling that the
Federal Communications Act prohibited the
tapping of interstate telephone wires by
law enforcement officers.
The act was somewhat ambiguous. and
Justices Sutherland and McReynolds, who
had been condemned during the court
tight as being among those justices who
usurped the functions Of Congress and
thwarted its will BY, enforcing their own
ideas Of what the law should be, dissented.
Their contention was that the majority
opinion ignored the obvious intent Of Con-
gress since the legislators would have been
specific had they intended the act to apply
to law enforcement officers.
During the past few days Congress took
sides with the dissenting Justices and the
Senate passed and sent to the House
bill which would nullify the majority de-
cision as applied to officers Of the law.
When the justices return In October for
the new term, they will fnd only one i'm
portant New Deal case awaiting them
the suit by 10 private utilities to test the
constitutionality OF the Tennessee Valley
Authority. But with Justices Van De-
vanter and Sutherland replaced by Justices
Black and Reed. there appears no chance
that that litigation win serve to break the
Preddsntss record befors Tie court.