Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-06-26
'Justice' Lawrence

have been treated to q new
diatribe against the Supreme
Court by that eminent "jurist"
David Lawrence. Now Mr..
Lawrence suggests that the
judges Of the Supreme Court
should be elected for limited
periods rather than appointed
for life. This is supposed to be
the punishment Of the judges
for handing down decisions
which do not appeal to Mr..
Lawrence.
am not q lawyer and,
therefore. not really qualified
to address myself to the merits
Of the cases in question but it
seems to me that the very ma
ture Of an action before the
Supreme Court, or any other
court, involves differences Of
opinion and uncertainties re-
garding legal questions and
constitutional interpretations.
Unless the Supreme Court
exercises original jurisdiction,
most Of the cases have gone
through lower courts and still
all doubts have not been re-
solved. Therefore. when q case
finally comes to the Supreme
Court someone will be made
unhappy. One Of the two hti-
giants must lose the case. Now
Mr.. Lawrence thinks that the
Supreme Court decided wrong
In some recent cases. Had the
court decided the other way no
doubt some other people, may
be without access to O syn
dicated column, would have
felt unhappy. Mr.. Lawrence
seems particularly unhappy
that the Court did not stick to
old precedents. OF course II
the court would always be
obliged TO do that we would
still have slavery and child
labor in the United States. Mr..
Justice Harlan changed his
mind In one case. Is that UNI
constitutional?
All Of the above only means
that Mr.. Lawrence is an
opinonated man who does not
understand the function Of the
Supreme Court In q democratic
society. but when he, as he
does, suggests that Justices
Black and Frankfurter are
friendly to people who have
had past associations" with
Communists. he is. in my opin-
ion. way OF base. Freedom Of
the press. which is protected
by the Constitution and the
Supreme Court, allows him to
write as he does but such
fanciful statements and i'm
plications should not 60 un-
challenged. On the other hand
1t is really unnecessary to de-
fend either the Court or the
individual justices. Scribblers
like Mr.. Lawrence come and
60. but the Supreme Court en-
dures.
George X. Schueller.
According to David Law
renee. the Supreme Court has
crippled the effectiveness of
congressional investigations.
BY one sweeping decision, 1t
has opened the way to Com
munists. traitors. disloyal citi-
zens and crooks Of all kinds In
business and in labor-to Ere
fuse to answer" any question
which the witness arbitrarily
decides for himself is not per
tinent" to a legislative purpose.
For the most part as Mr..
Lawrence says, the Supreme
Court justices live in legal
"vacuums." They display a
curious "unawareness" Of the
actual operations Of Commu-
mist subversion.
During these perilous times,
does any man or group OF men,
charged with the terrible re-
,sponsibility OF decisions vital
TO the very life Of our nation.
have q moral right to live in
any kind Of a vacuum, even
II he can?
Do we not have a right TO
expect that our leaders. par
ticularly men appointed TO high,
lifetime positions, accept the
responsibility TO inform them
selves thoroughly on the "ac-
tual operations Of Communist
subversion?" Particularly when
they are In q position to hand
down decisions having a direct
bearing on whether Commu.
nism shall or shall not flourish
in our American system OF
government?
Lila d. S0nnemann
y
Some readers took Davic
Lawrence to task for his use
and understanding Of the wort
"etiology."
It is obvious from Mr.. Law.
rence's column June 20 thai