Evening star., 1952-06-02
Previous Approval
OF Seizure Rejected

~ O~s@~sS NSISSSSo
Moreover, the use of the seiz-
ure technique to solve labor
disputes in order to prevent
work stoppages was not only
unauthorized by any congress
siona1 enactment; prior to this
controversy, Congress had re-
fused to adopt that method Of
settling labor disputes. When
the Taft Hartley Act was un-
der consideration in 1947, Con-
gress rejected an amendment
ment which would have author
lied such governmental seizures
in cases of emergency. Ap-
parently it was thought that
the technique of seizure, like
that of compulsory arbitration,
would interfere with the process
of collective bargaining. Con-
sequently, the plan Congress
adopted in that act did not pro-
vide for seizure under any cir
cumstances. Instead, the plan
sought to bring about settle
ments by use of the customary
devices of mediation, concilia-
ton, investigation by boards of
inquiry, and public reports. In
some instances temporary in
functions were authorized to
provide cooling-off periods. All
this failing, the unions were left
free to strike if the majority of
the employees, by secret ballot.
expressed desire to do so.
1t is clear that If the Presi-
dent had authority to issue the
order he did, it must be found in
some provisions of the Consti-
tuition. And it is not claimed
that express constitutional
language grants this power to
the President. The contention
Is that presidential power should
be implied from the aggregate
of his powers under Article II
of the Constitution. Particular
reliance is placed on the pro-
visions which say that "the ex-
ecutive Power shall be vested
in a President -. -: that "he
shall take Care that the Laws
be faithfully executed. and
that he Shall be Commander
in Chief of the Army and Navy
of the United States"
The order cannot properly be
sustained as an exercise of the
Presidents military power as
Commander in Chief of the
Armed Forces. The Govern
ment attempts to do SO by cit
ing a number of cases upholding
broad powers in military COM
manders engaged in day-to-day
fighting in a theater of war.
Such cases need not concern us
here. Even though "theater of
war" be an expanding concept.
we cannot with faithfulness to
our constitutional system hold
that the Commander in Chief
of the Armed Forces has the ul-
innate power as such to take
possession of private property in
order to keep labor disputes
from stopping production. This
is a job for the Nations law
makers, not for its military
authorities.
Nor can the seizure order be
sustained because Of the sew
eral constitutional provisions
that grant executive power, to
the President. In the frame
work of our Constitution, the
Presidents power to see that
the laws are faithfully executed
refutes the idea that he is to
be a lawmaker. The COnstitu-
ton limits his functions in the
law-making process to the rec
ommending Of laws he thinks
wise and the vetoing of laws he
thinks bad. And the Constitu-
ton is neither silent nor equiv
ocal about who shall make laws
which the President is to exc
cute. The first section of the
first article says that "All legis-
lative Powers herein granted
shall be vested In a Congress Of
the United States - After
granting many powers to the
Congress Article I goes on to
provide that Congress may
make all Laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carry
ing into Execution the foregoing
Powers and all other Powers
vested by this Constitution in
the Government Of the United
States. or in any Department
or Officer thereof"
The Presidents order does
not direct that q congressional
policy be executed in a manner
prescribed by Congress-it di-
rects that a presidential policy
be executed In a manner pre-
scribed by the President. The
preamble of the order itself,
like that of many statutes, sets
out reasons why the President
believes certain policies should
be adopted, proclaims these
policies as rules of conduct to
be followed, and again, like q
statute, authorizes a Govern
ement ofi1cial to promulgate adj
ditional rules and regulations
consistent with the policy pro-
claimed and needed to carry
that policy into execution. ThS
power Of Congress to adopt
such public policies as those
proclaimed by the order is be-
yond question. It can author
] ize the taking of private prop
erty for public use. It can make
i laws regulating the relation