Evening star., 1961-03-02
A Court at War

III IWO supreme Court decisions this
week, the dissenting judges issued what
amounts to declaration of war against
the House Committee on Un-American
Activities. OF perhaps greater import
ance, these dissenters, or at least three
OF them, also apparently are at war with
the tive-man majority.
: The cases involved two suspected
Communists named Frank Will
kinson and Carl Braden-and they are
essentially the same as far as the con-
Stltuttonal issue involved is concerned.
The question was whether these men
could lawfully invoke the First Amend
ment-not the Fifth Amendment with
It's no standardization clause-in re-
tuSing to answer committee questions.
Justice Stewart spoke for the five
man majority in each case His holding.
to take the Wilkinson case, was that the
latter could not successfully invoke the
First Amendment in refusing to answer
this question: Are you now a member
OF the Communist Party?" The majority
found that Congress had duly autnor-
tzed the committees investigation, that
the question was relevant to the inquiry,
and that its pertinancy had been ade-
quately explained to the witness. It also
rejected the claim that the committees
purpose was not to obtain information
for possible use in legislating, but rather
to "persecute" Wilkinson because he had
been among the committees critics This
is all that it held, and we do not think
americans need pass SleepleSs nights,
fearful that the projections of the Bill
OF Rights have been stripped from them.
To read the dissent by Justice Black,
Joined by Chief Justice Warren and
Justice Douglas, however, one might
readily conclude that our days of free
dom are numbered.
1t is clear, he said, that the Un-
American Activities Committee is using
the contempt power of the House "as a
weapon against those who dare to criti-
cize it." Then, in sweeping and, we
think, grossly eXtraVagant attack on the
majority ruling, he made these claims:
From now on anyone who takes a'public
position against the committee runs the
risk OF being required to appear in some
far off place to be questioned about
every minute detail of his past life
with this powerful weapon in the COM
mittee's hands not many people in our
society will have the courage to speak
out against such formidable opponent
government by consent will dis
appear to be replaced by government
by intimidation . true AmericaniSm
Is to be protected, not by committees
that perSecute "unorthodox minorities,"
but by strict adherence to basic prin-
clpleS OF freedom and, finally, the
provisions Of the Bill of Rights were in
tended to prevent "iuSt the sort of gov
ernmental suppression of criticism that
the majority upholds here"
This is an astonishing distortion of
the majority decision, which held only
that Wilkinson, under the circumstances
OF this case, could not, under the First
Amendment, refuse to say whether lie
belonged to the Communist Party. To
suggest, as the dissenters do, that the
court majority is wrecking the Bill of
Rights would, if widely believed, destroy
public confidence in the Supreme Court
as the guardian of our liberties.
Happily, there is very little evidence
Of public acceptance of the minority
views-perhapS because of their very ex-
travagance. In the face of an attack
led by James Roosevelt, the House yes
terday approved the full budget re-
queSted for the Un-American Activities
Committee. The vote was 412 to 6. Were
these 412 House members motivated by
the fears which haunt the court mi
nority? OF course not. They voted as they
did because they believe there is need
for diligent and continuing investiga-
tion of Communist activities in this
country, and because they know that the
vast majority Of their constituents share
this belief. We take this vote to mean
that confidence in the court has not been
shaken by the minority attack, and this
is most gratifying, especially at a time
when, Justice Black to the contrary
individual rights must be balanced"
against the national need to search out
and deal with Communist attempts at
SIbVerSiOn