Evening star., 1960-03-05
Court Under Fire

The Supreme Courts decision this
week in the Globe case has brought
that tribunal under fire from journal
istic guns which generally are trained
upon anyone else who preSumes to crit
icize the court. One Of the Journalistic
critics went so far as to say that the
Globe decision "deprives the Supreme
Court OF the intellectual respect it needs
now more than 1t ever did" All Of which
brings to mind the adage concerning
distinctions which arise, depending upon
whose OK is being gored
Arthur Globe, temporary employe
Of Los Angeles County, was dismissed
after he had refused to tell a subcom-
mtttee OF the House Committee on I'm
American Activities whether he was
member OF the Communist Party. Globe
had been warned by his superiorS that,
under regulations and State law, a re-
fusal to answer for any reason would
result in his dismissal for inSubordina-
ton. He refused on several grounds, in
cluding, in general terms, the First and
Fifth Amendments.
The courts problem was to distin-
guiSh this situation from its 1856 ruling
in the case Of Harry Slochower, a Brook
lyn College professor, who was dismissed
by the City of New York for refusing to
answer question concerning past Com
muniSt aft1liationS. He invoked the Fifth
Amendment ground of possible Self-in-
elimination. Slochower's dismissal, the
court said, was unconstitutional.
AS we read the two opinions, the dis
tinction drawn between the Globe case
and the Slochower case is an exceedingly
fine one. Nevertheless, there is a distinc-
tion. And certain facts should be con-
sidered before one concludes that the
court has forfeited its right to intellec-
tual respect, or, as Justice Black put it,
that the Globe decision docs not bode
well for individual liberty in America"
The court divided S to 4 in the Slo-
chower case, with Justice Reed writing
what we thought was a persuasive dis
sent. The division in the Globe case was
5to 3. In companion case this week,
involving a permanent fellow employe
OF Globes, the division was 4 to 4. (The
court did not discuss this case, but the
even division had the effect of also up
holding the permanent employees dis
missal on the same grounds as those in
the Globe case.)
An interesting point is that Chief
Justice Warren, who joined the majority
ia the Slochower case, did not partici-
pate in either of this weeks decisions
presumably because he was still Gov
eFror OF California when the statute
involved in the Globe case was under
consideration. In some future case he
might well join this weeks minority.
Another interesting point is that Justice
Clark wrote the majority opinions in
both Globe and Slochower. Finally, the
5-to-3 majority in the Globe case resulted
from the fact that Justice Frankfurter,
also in the majority in Slochower, agreed
with Justice Clark that a valid distinc-
ton could be drawn between the two
decisions.
To us, this suggests honest differ
enceS Of opinion on fine points of law
We do not think the court, as a result
of Globe, should be refused intellectual
respect, nor do we believe that the Globe
ruling raises threat to individual lib
erty in America. 1t is possible, of course,
that the Globe decision amounts in
practical effect to modification Of Slo-
chower. II so, we are not alarmed. For
our sympathies were with the four dis
senters in the Slochower case, and we
would welcome tendency on the part
Of the court, If such a tendency exists,
to move away from that decision.