Evening star., 1950-05-02
Fuqitives From Justice

The law governing the extradtion OF fugi-
tives from justice, which had seemed clear
enough, was clothed with some doubt last year
when the Third Federal Court, sitting in Phila-
delphia, released convicted murderer rather
than send him back to Georgia. The basis for
this action was the history of allegedly brutal
treatment Of prisoners in Georgia. The effect of
the action was to liberate a murderer among the
people Of Pennsylvania over the objections and
protests of officials of that State.
Now a somewhat similar case has been
decided by the Federal Court of Appeals here.
man named Lewis A. Johnson was indicted in
Georgia for robbery. He escaped, came to Wash
ington, and was caught here. The Court of
Appeals, dividing two to one, refused to follow
the example of the Third Circuit Court, and Or
dered that Johnson be returned to Georgia
for trial.
Judge Prettyman, speaking for the majority,
pointed out that If any of Johnson's constitu-
tional rights have been violated or If they should
be violated, both the State and the Federal
courts in Georgia are open to him. Declaring
that it would be an act of "unwarranted arro-
gance" for judges of this court to ascribe to
themselves virtue superior to that of the judges
of other courts, Judge Prettyman said: eve are
asked to assume that appellant (Johnson) would
not be protected by the courts in Georgia. We
not only decline to make the assumption but we
repudiate the suggestion that we make it. We
will not impugn either the capacity or the
integrity of the State courts of Georgia or of
any.other State. And even if we were to assume,
on the basis of this fugitives allegations that
the State courts are impervious to his assertions
we would make no such assumption concerning
the Federal courts having jurisdiction in that
State Those courts of the United States are as
capable and faithful as are the courts of this or
any other Jurisdiction"
That, to The Star seems to be the proper
and the sensible view. If 1t is not followed, the
extradition law is soon going to be in chaotic
condition
Judge Bazelon, dissenting, thought that
Johnson'S case should have been heard on it's
meritS-that his complaints against Georgia
should have been tried before deciding whether
he should be sent back to that State. He agreed
that it is "regrettably true" that his view, if
adopted, might in a case like that before the
Third Circuit Court, result in turning loose a
convicted murderer. Nevertheless, he said, he
was in "thoroughgoing agreement" with one of
the Third Circuit judges, who declared: :.
better it be that potentially dangerous indi-
vidual be set free than that the least degree of
impairment of an individuals basic constitu-
tional rights be permitted"
What might constitute the '1east degree" of
impairment of a constitutional right is an
unsettled question. Presumably, under the Third
Circuit ruling using chains on prisoners Is
enough. But why should not that question be
left to the courts in Georgia? The right of the
public to be protected against murderers and
other dangerous criminals should receive some
consideration. But it receives precious little when
judges say they would rather release criminal
in a strange city than leave the protection of
his constitutional rights to the courts in his own
State whose rulings always would be subject to
review by the Supreme Court.