Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1958-04-06
BY Jury

Your editorial. Trial by
Jury" april %. has been
read with mixed reactions.
AS one who ardently opposed
the jury trial amendment to
the civil rights bill. I have.
as you suggested. read the
latest opinion Of the Su-
preme Court on the right to
jury trial in criminal con-
tempt cases.
/ must agree with you that
it is regrettable that this
opinion was not available
during the debate on the
civil rights bill in the last
session Of Congress. The ma
jority opinion, a scholarly
and well-documented EXPOSE
ton of the law would have
added weight to the argu-
mentS advanced by us pro-
ponents Of civil rights against
the adoption Of a jury trial
amendment.
- Unfortunately. YOU have
seen At to overlook the ma
jority opinion entirely in
your eagerness to focus at
tention upon the dissent Of
three Of the justices. That
dissent echoes the views OF
those who sought to alter
what has been the law in
this country since adoption
Of our Constitution. Without
debating here the desirability
of amending the law. sufiice
1t to say that change. If 1t
comes. should come by way
Of legislation and not by
judicial decree based upon
the conviction of a handful
of Judges that 1.-The previous
cases to the contrary are
wrong"
The opinion of Justice
Frankfurter is reassuring, in
deed. at q time when the sta
bilIty Of the law has been so
sorely challenged. To him
the court is not hidebound by
previous decisions. but neither
is it IAN originating law
maker" or third branch Of
the legislature" AS to the
suggestion Of the minority
that q jury be required in
every case Of criminal con-
tempt. Justice Frankfurter
struck at the heart Of the
matter when he said:
:. ut Is for Congress to ex-
tend this participation Of the
jury, whenever 1t sees At to
do so, to other instances OF
: the exercise Of the power to
punish for contempt. 1t Is not
for this court to fashion a
wholly novel constitutional
doctrine that would require
such participation whatever
Congress may think on the
matter, and in the teeth Of
an unbroken legislative and
judicial history from the
foundation OF the Nation"
Last sum m er. Congress
heard and considered every
argument advanced in both
the majority and dissenting
opinions Of the court. BY an
overwhelming majority OF
those who we're not already
committed to vote TO defeat
the civil rights bill. Congress
agreed to the so-called COM
promise jury trial provision.
Those who voted for civil
rights. and who fought for
what they believed to be the
traditional powers Of the
courts. have now been Justly
vindicated by a majority OF
the Supreme Court.
/, for one, certainly do not
view the dissenting members
OF the court as any less con-
cerned with civil liberties
than I. Their views should be
welcomed and respected. But
emphasize they are q mi
nority. Their views have not
prevailed. Until they do, they
should be taken for what I
am sure they were intended
-as earnest and constructive
criticism and not. as you term
1t, as eloquent rebuke."
The majority has expressed
the correct state Of the law as
1t is and always has been.
Any change. such as the in
novation Of jury trial sug-
gested in the civil rights de-
bate. should come. II at all.
only after thorough discus
sion and by application to all
contempt cases. not solely
: civil rights cases.
Kenneth b. Heating,
nnnrnnntaAnAi,rn ENrn,,n Mn,rt