The potters herald. [volume] (East Liverpool, Ohio) 1899-1982, 1944-01-20
COMMENT ON WORLD
EVENTS

If the letter of the law works an
injustice, can the courts intervene to
prevent such injustice? This, in brief,
was the question presented to the L. S.
Supreme Court recently in a draft
case involving a member of the reli-
gious sect, Jehovah's Witness. The
august court decided. with only one
member dissenting, that the law must
take its course regardless of whether
it worked for justice or injustice.
Conscripted men must report for in
duction before getting court review of
their draft classification, the Supreme
Court ruled in an to l opinion by
Justice Hugo l.. Black, Justice Frank
Murphy dissenting. The opinion was
handed down Jan. S in the case of
Nick Falbo, Pennsylvania Jehovahs
Witness, who claimed exemption as Il
minister. This claim was denied by his
draft board.
Charging error and prejudice, FalbO
did not report for duty, was arrested
and sentenced to > years i'm prison by
the federal court at Pittsburgh.
4
The American Civil Liberties Union
filed Il brief in support of Falbo's con
tention declaring:
"The decision leaves us just where
we were before. 1t does not relieve con
ScentiOuS obiectOrS who refuse to 90
into the army to test their rights. 1t
will do nothing to stop the stream to
prison of men improperly classified by
local and appeals boards"
Justice Black, for the majOrity, held:
The narrow question therefore pre-
Sented by this case is whether Con
greSS has authorized judicial review of
the propriety of boards classification
in a criminal prosecution for wilful
of an order directing a regis
trant to report for the last step in the
Selective process. We think it has not
surely if Congress had intended to
interference with that pro-
cess by intermediate challenges of
orders to report, it would have said So
Justice Murphy's dissent is worthy
of close study by every trade unionist,
by every citizen who wishes to see the
law and the courts protect human
rights He said:
common sense and justice dictate
that Il citizen accused of Il crime should
have the fullest hearing possible, plus
the opportunity to present every reason
able defense. Only an unenlightened
condemns an individual
without according him those rights.
Such denial is especially oppressive
where Il full hearing might disclose
that the administrative action under
lying the prosecution is the product OF
excess wartime emotions. Experience
that in time of war indi-
vidual liberties cannot always be en-
trusted safely to uncontrolled admins
trative discretion.
1T is evident that there is no eX
plicit provision in the Act permitting
the raising of this particular defense
and that the legislative history is
silent on the matter. The power to ad-
minister complete justice and to con
slider all reasonable pleas and defenseS
must be presumed in the absence of
legislation to the contrary"
Then comes the climax of Justice
fine dissent, in which he
says:
THAT an individual should languiSn
in prison for five years without being
accorded the opportunity of proving
that the prosecution was based upon
arbitrary and illegal administrative
action is not iii keeping with the high
standards of our judicial system.
The law knows no finer hour than
when il cuts through formal concepts
and tranSitory emotions TO protect un-
popular citizens against discrimination
and persecution"