Supreme Court — Part 26

116 pages · May 11, 2026 · Broad topic: Politics & Activism · Topic: Supreme Court · 108 pages OCR'd

‹

—— GC 2) As Mr, Frank Ober pointed out yesterday during his testimony, original jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction are two separate things in law, and are treated quite separately in Article III of the Constitution, (3) That the provisions of Article III, section 2, clause 2 of the Constitution, respecting the power of the Congress to regulate and make exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, lave been somehow negatived by the adoption of some amendment to the Constitution. Two amendments have been suggested as possibly modifying the cited provisions of Article III, They are the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. Now, the Fourteenth Amendment can hardly be deemed as amendatory of Article III of the Constitution, since the amendment is concerned with actions by the States and Article III is concerned with a grant of power to one of the branches of the Federal Government, The Fifth Amendment, of course, cannot be said to repeal Article III, and is not in any direct and apparent conflict with certain individual rights and if one of those protected rights should be directly interfered with through an exercise of power under Article III, it is conceivable that such an exercise of power might be deemed unconstitutional. We come then to consideration of whether anything in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution can be deemed to render my bill unconstitutional, Principal proponent of the contention that the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution might be conSidered as a bar to enactment of my bill was Mr, Tom Harris who testified representing the AFL-CIO, Mr. Harris did not say that my bill was unconstitutional: he simply suggested how a court might

›

——

GC 2)

As Mr, Frank Ober pointed out yesterday during his testimony, original

jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction are two separate things in law,

and are treated quite separately in Article III of the Constitution,
(3) That the provisions of Article III, section 2, clause 2 of

the Constitution, respecting the power of the Congress to regulate and

make exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, lave

been somehow negatived by the adoption of some amendment to the Constitution.

Two amendments have been suggested as possibly modifying the cited provisions

of Article III, They are the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment.

Now, the Fourteenth Amendment can hardly be deemed as amendatory of Article III

of the Constitution, since the amendment is concerned with actions by the

States and Article III is concerned with a grant of power to one of the branches

of the Federal Government, The Fifth Amendment, of course, cannot be said

to repeal Article III, and is not in any direct and apparent conflict with

certain individual rights and if one of those protected rights should be

directly interfered with through an exercise of power under Article III,

it is conceivable that such an exercise of power might be deemed unconstitutional.
We come then to consideration of whether anything in the Fifth

Amendment to the Constitution can be deemed to render my bill unconstitutional,
Principal proponent of the contention that the Fifth Amendment to the

Constitution might be conSidered as a bar to enactment of my bill was

Mr, Tom Harris who testified representing the AFL-CIO, Mr. Harris did not

say that my bill was unconstitutional: he simply suggested how a court might