Evening star., 1939-04-17
By j. A. FOX.

The Supreme Court held today
that the Government could not de-
port Joseph G. Strecker. the Aus
trlan-born restaurant keeper whom
the Government has been trying to
get rid of for five years on the
ground that he was an alien Com
munist.
Strecker was a former member Of
the Communist party and the Gov
eminent sought his deportation on
the allegation that a tenet of that
party favors overthrow of the demo-
cratic form of government. The
court, however. did not pass on the
purposes and aims of the party.
1t said specifically. however, that
the fact that Strecker had formerly
been a member Of an organization
advocating overthrow of the Gov
ernment would not be sufficient to
cause his deportation.
The importance of the case has
been intensified because the Labor
Department had held up deportation
proceedings against Harry Bridges,
the West Coast labor leader, who is
accused of Communism.
Reynolds. Butler Dissent.
The opinion was read by Justice
Roberts. Justices Reynolds and
Butler dissented.
Strecker, resident of Hot Springs,
Ark. came into this country legally
in 1912 In 1888 he petitioned for
naturalization but before completing
the process deportation proceedings
against him were begun.
On November H. 1888. the Labor
Department issued warrant of de-
portation charging that % he is an
alien believing in the overthrow of
the United States by force and vio-
lence and CD that after coming
into this country he joined the
Communist party which, it was con-
tended, believes in the overthrow
OF the United States by force.
In August. 1884, Strecker's de-
portation was ordered on these
grounds. He got a habaes corpus
to stay deportation in the Federal
Court of the Eastern District of
Louisiana, but after a hearing the
writ was vacated. On appeal to
the Fifth Circuit, the court held up
the deportation and sent the case
to the lower court for rehearing.
The Court of Appeals said that
the statute provides only for de-
portation of an alien who believes
IN the overthrow of the government
or belongs to an organization which
advocates overthrow of the gov
ernment and that no evidence was
brought in to support either of the
government contentious.
No Grounds for New Trial.
The Supreme Court said that
there were no grounds for a new
trial and 'as the Secretary erred
In the construction of the statute"
the habeas corpus which Strecker
sought must be granted and he be
discharged from custody.
The judgment of the Circuit
Court OF Appeals is accordingly
modified and the case is remanded
to the District Court with instruc-
tlons to proceed in conformity with
this opinion" the court said.
Recalling that Strecker had ad-
mitted that he joined the Com
munist party in November. 1882. but
had got out prior to March l, 1888,
the court said that "in some re-
spects his testimony as to his beliefs
and actions was contradictory of his
statements on prior examination,
and testimony was elected from him
IN an effort to show that his
denial of present affiliation with
the Communist party might not b.,
MADE in good faith. but there was
no sufficient evidence to sustaii.
that conclusion"
In view of the fact, the court SAL
that the Government no longer cor
tends that Strecker does belong /
an organization which advocatc
overthrow of the Governmer.
the question which is presented
whether the act renders forme
membership in such an organize
ton, or which has ceased, a ground
for deportation"
1--WE hold that the act does not
provide for the deportation of such
an alien," Justice Roberts opinion
said. This conclusion rests not
alone upon the language. but, as
we'll, upon the context and the his
tory of the legislation"
Citing the language of the statute,
the court said that the construction
which the Government seeks to
(see COURT, Page A-40