Evening star., 1940-03-01
Unjust Determinations


the citizens Of the States before
courts of the United States is made
through the Gwynne bill Just ap-
proved by the House Committee on
the Judiciary.
Article 3, section of the Constitu-
ton provides, where there is
diversity of citizenship, that the
judicial power of the United States
shall extend to controversies
between a State and the citizens of
another State; between citizens Of
different States - and between q
State or the citizens thereof, and
foreign states, citizens, or subjects"
There are several joint resolutions
pending before both the House of
Representatives and the Senate, pro-
posing amendments to the Constitu-
ton, which contain provisions for
removing this disability from Dis
trict residents. Different forms Of
amendment for this purpose are
carried in the Capper- Norton Joint
resolution and the Summers joint
resolution.
The inability to sue and be sued
in the courts OF the United States
has long been listed as one Of Wash
ington's grievances. This lack of
equality of District citizens with the
citizens of the States has placed the
local people at serious disadvantage
In having their controversies with
citizens Of the States equitably
adjudicated. A citizen of the District
Of Columbia with grievance against
a citizen of State has had to bring
suit in the State court of that citizen
unless it was possible to get service
on the defendant in the District Of
Columbia for trial in a court Of the
District of Columbia. On the other
hand, citizen Of a State has had
the right to take his controversy
against citizens of other States into a
United States court where he would
be able to have the issues tried on,
an equal footing. And also If a
citizen of one State is sued by a
citizen of another State in a State
court, the person sued has the right
to have the case transferred to
United States court where the two,
as American citizens, are on an
equality before the court. A citizen
OF the District does not enjoy such
privilege, but If sued in a State court,
would have to stand trial in that
court on an unequal footing with the
plaintiff.
District citizens have labored
under this difficulty and disability
since an opinion rendered by Chief
Justice John Marshall in the case of
Hepburn VS.. Elzey The Chief Justice
in this instance held that the District
of Columbia was not a State as con-
templated by the Constitution and
that the citizens of the District were,
therefore, not the citizens of State.
The Chief Justice remarked, 1T is
extraordinary that the courts of the
United States, which are open to
aliens and to the citizens Of other
States in the Union, should be closed
upon them District residents). But
this is a subject for legislative, not
for judicial consideration"
The Senate District Committee in
1922, in reporting favorably upon an
amendment to the Constitution,
stated, "No sound argument can be
presented for the existing discrimi-
nation between citizens of the Dis
trict and those of the States when it
comes to the question of affording
relief so far as suits in United States
courts are concerned. This right is
even granted an alien, but denied
under the Constitution to citizen
of the District. The right is valu-
able one and has been consistently
so recognized since the adoption of
the Judiciary Act in 1890. It is time
that this discrimination should cease,
and the people Of the District given
the same rights in all respects as
citizens of the States, through adop-
tion of a constitutional amendment,
such as provided in the present
resolution"
The Gwynne bill attempts to~cure
this defect in the judicial system
through an amendment to the Ju-
dietary Act Of 1890. It makes the
statute applicable to citizens of the
District of Columbia, which is not
the case in the original act. As the
decision handed down by Chief JUS
tice Marshall was based entirely upon
constitutional construction, some
constitutional lawyers are in doubt
as to the Gwynne bills accomplish
ing the relief sought. The constitu-
tional amendment proposed by the
Summers resolution provides that the
judicial power of the United States
shall extend to all controversies to
which the citizens of the District
shall be parties in the same manner
as it applies to the controversies to
which the citizens Of State shall be
parties. Adoption of the Summers
Tor the Capper-Norton) constitu-
| tional amendment would remove anv