Evening star., 1952-05-14
Date Of High Courts
Steel Seizure Ruling
Adds New Factor
By Robert K. Walsh

The date of the Supreme Court
decision in the steel case and the
possible range of the ruling were
matters of popular speculation and
judicial silence today.
The tribunal. at the close of
oral arguments late yesterday.
gave some evidence that its first
vote might be on when to rule,
rather than on how to decide.
Justice Jackson said he would
oppose announcing any decision
until it could be accompanied by
written opinions. If his colleagues
consent to that procedure, a pro-
nouncement on the case involv-
ing President Truman's seizure of
the steel mills might not come
this month.
June is the tentative date for
start of the recess until October 6.
The tribunal follows a fairly fixed
practice of disposing of all pend
ing cases before a term ends.
Court officials explained this does
not mean every remaining case or
petition is necessarily settled. It
means only that some action is
taken or statement made in each
instance. they said.
Speculation on Scope.
The biggest puzzle to the 40 in
dustry and Government attorneys
actively identified with the case
is whether the high court will rule
directly on the main Constitu-
tional issue.
District Court Judge David A. !
Pine held, on April 20. that the
Presidents order was unconstitu-
tional and illegal. He found that |
the President had no inherent
powers under the Constitution to
justify such action and no spe-
cif1c statute to support the move.
The bulk of questions by various
justices during the two days of
oral arguments touched on con-
stitutional aspects. But that gave
no sure sign to lawyers and laymen
that the court would settle the /
historic constitutional problem at
this time instead of handing down
an opinion on numerous related |
constitutional points.
Return of Case Doubted.
Some lawyers said they saw little
likelihood that the Supreme Court
would return the case to the
United States Court of Appeals for
additional argument on merits. /
Nor did they believe the case would
be sent back to District Court for /
a closer look into the industry's /
claim of irreparable damage un-
der the seizure.
John w. Davis, concluding the
argument for the steel companies
yesterday. told the court the Gov
ernment threat of a wage increase
during the seizure was a sufficient
showing of irreparable damage. He
cited bureaucratic machinery" he
said was set up to change wages
and working conditions in the in
dustry.
Solicitor General Philip P. PERL
man accused the industry of rails
ing fantastic hobgoblins He as
serted that the companies have
not experienced and would not
suffer irreparable damage. If they
have any loss at all during the
seizure. they can recover just COM
pensation later in the courts, he
added.
The present national emer-
gency and world crisis so nearly
resembles an actual state of war
for the United States that Pres
ident Truman's seizure order was
the only effective way to assure
steel production, Mr.. Perlman in
sisted.
Mr.. Davis urged the court to
center it's attention on the claims
of inherent power of the Presi-
dent, in the absence of specific
provisions, to take private prop
erty to meet an emergency as he
sees fit.
Sees no Parallel.
The case, Mr.. Davis said, is
without parallel in United States
history" He said he looked con-
fidently to the judiciary to hold
the balance between the powers
Of Constitutional functionaries."
Before taking the case under
advisement the Supreme Court
heard Arthur j. Goldberg, gen.
eral counsel for the CIO Steel
workers Union, and Clifford D.
O'Brien and Harold c. Heiss. at
torneys for three railroad unions.
Mr.. Goldberg did not discuss
the Constitutional question. He
described the seizure as distaste-
full to the union. But he declared
that Taft Hartley Act provisions
could not have accomplished any
thing if Present Truman had
used them last month.
Mr.. Goldberg denied that Pres
ident Truman ignored the intent
4. e. L l.