Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Supreme Court — Part 24
Page 33
33 / 55
qi it
pe
ong the audacious and illegal decisions
dered by the United States Supreme
at its recent session was one depriv-
A the states of the right to prescribe quatif-
F ong for persona who seek to engage in
seca the practice of law. As well said by Senator
“7 Jenner, of Indiana, this ig essentially and
yy Particularly a local matter, which each state
{must be permitted to decide for itself. Yet
Supreme Court of the United States, in
recent Schware and Konigsberg - cases,
agecting applicants for the bar in New Mex-
. and California, respectively, denied the
~.4 Tight of a state to require an applicant for
-*"Tadmission fo the bar, in the course of being
=; {examined ag to hig character and fitness to
@ practice law, to answer questions designed
- to elicit information about past connections
_ » and associations with Communists and Com-
““munjst organizations, and denied the rig’
:, Of ajState Supreme Court ta find that
™ longtime association of an applicant wi
ve. | the unist Party, as a member of su
arti 7a FL
G
Pn pe a
~ 65 SEP 11 1957 » 17
Which such jurisdiction should be withdraw
Party, was @ proper “tector” to be considered: ”
in determining the character and Fitness “
the applicant. : Oo
In the words of the resolution offered by .
. Chief Justice Norman F. Arterburn of the’
Supreme Court of Indiana, at the recent’
meeting of the Chief Justices of the, State 4
Supreme Courts: - ;
“The United States Supreme Court: “has”
transgressed sound legal principles, and inf
particular, usurped fact-finding functions. .
“Moreover, the United States
Court hag encroached upon the Jurisdicti
of the state courts. ....
“Although the United States Supreme
Court has the authority to fix its own stand-
ards of character and fitness to practice in
the Federal courts, we do not recognize nor
concede that it may do so for the courts of
the several states of this Union.”
Tt may be there are other areas tn whi
the appellate jurisdiction of the Supre:
Court should be restricted or with respect
]
Mr. Tictter
Mr. Nease _____
Tde, Room____.
Mr. Hojloman_.
Misa Gandy___.
FREDERICK SULLENS,
EDITGR
JACKSON DAILY NEWS
JACKSON, MISS.
18/24/57.
Page 6 Cols. 1 & 2
aperk 7 ven
(2 s7z fo"
ro NOT OT RECORDED
Ml SEP id 1950
DT el
—e
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
letter
bureau
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic