◆ SpookStack

- 7” = Justices Black and Douglas, who were tie-éwo dissenters in the Dennis case, would haye gone much further than the majority in the California case. They said, in a ceparate opinion, that the statutory basis for the Los Angeles convictions “abridges freedom of speech, press and assembly Imyviolation of the First Amendment.” B; returning nine of the cxses for retrial, the Suprene Court invites the Department of Jus- : tice to thow what it can do in the light of this decision, «1¢ Attorney General Brownell. staff SeeDeaey Velntral Svar S _ has evidenie that can be made to stand up in , Court, now i the time to get busy on it. The Service case, decided 8 to 0, was nar- rowly based on the procedure followed in the discharge of the diplomat, as of “doubtful loyal- ty,” by Secretary ef State Acheson six years ago. Reviewing the steps In the case, the Su- preme Court found that the State Department's own regulations were yidated when lower loyalty ‘review boards were overruled by a higher board which then was supported hy the Secretary of State, * eo" 4 Chief Justice Warren, another Eisenhower appointee, spoke for the Supreme Court in the 6to-1 Watkins case. Reading a sharp lesson to the House of Representatives as weli as to jis Un- American Activities Committee, ihe Chief stice said that the labor leader was net accorded @ a>tair opportunity ta deter- mine whether he wae in his rights”in re- fusing to answer. There is no general | authority to expose the private affairs | individuals without justification tw terms of the furictions of Congress. Nor is tire Con- gress a law enforcement or trial agency, - These are functions of the executive and: : judicial departments of government. , No inquiry fs an end in itself; it must be patatad ta and in a ee ee Peper ry pemerer aa SCIALTU LY ahi in furt LHELRDEE UL @ 16g 1UTALE task of the government. Investigations con- i ducted solely for the personal aggrandize- ment of the investigators or to punish those investigated are indefensible. The Chief Instice spoke also in the 6-to-2 Sweery case—in which the New Hamoshirs oro Soiy SSA ash Frasswes eae iVoy sanliipous © Peo cedure was “to summon a witness and (to try) to cdmpel him against his will to disclose the nature of his past éxpressjons and association.” This invaded the teacher's Ubetties in the lareas Of academic theedom and jolitical ex- jPression—and these, ag Mr. Warren said, are ; ‘areas in which government should he ex- , tremely reticent to tread.” Sweezy'’s testimony included statements that he was a Socialist In political orlentation, but that he had never been fa Communist party member and did not advo- _ cate forcible overthrow of the Government. ; There will be those to differ with one or i more of these detisions, as for example, Repre- sentative Smith of Virginia, author of the Smith Act. We believe, as we sald at the outset, that ‘ the Bill of Rights is the stronger beeause they have been handed down. For the Supreme Court s * ts saylng in effect that while the national * security, is vital and must be protected against F subversion, eo are the rights of citizens vital and an muet freadarn chan he nentacted eqatueat