vol. 8, no. 7

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS FREE ASSEMBLAGE

“Eternal is the price of liberty.”

Vol. VIII SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, JULY, 1943 No. 7

MILITARY CURFEW UPHELD

Racial Discrimination Justified By Necessity, Says High Court

Racial discrimination against citizens of Japanese extraction was upheld by the Su- preme Court of the United States on June 21 when it approved the curfew regulations imposed on all Pacific Coast Japanese by Lt. General J. L. DeWitt. In a unanimous de- cision handed down in the cases of Gordon Hirabayashi of Seattle and Minoru Yasui of Portland, Oregon, the court supported the discrimination on the ground of military necessity in war-time.

We understand that the court’s decision, which has not yet been examined by the Northern California Branch of the: A.C. L.U., dealt only with General DeWitt’s curfew orders and not with the evacuation. But it was apparently indicated that evacuavion In principle will be upheld if another case comes before the Court. One such case is pending in the Circuit Court of Appeals at San Francisco, that of Fred T. Korematsu.

A minor victory was scored by the Northern California Branch of the A.C.L.U. in that case. There, the Supreme Court of the United States, on a technical question, ruled the order subjecting Korematsu to five years’ probation to be a final decision and appealable, because there had been a determination of guilt followed by the institu- tion of disciplinary proceedings. The case has now been returned to the Circuit Court, which had requested instructions only on the question of the right of appeal, and a decision on the merits should follow in the near future.

In the curfew cases, the Chief Justice, speaking for the unanimous court, said: “We cannot close our eyes to the fact, demonstrated by experience, that in time of war residents having ethnic affiliations ‘with an invading enemy may be a greater ‘source of danger than those of a different ‘ancestry.

“Whatever views we may entertain re‘garding the loyalty to this country of the citizens of Japanese ancestry we cannot reject as unfounded the judgment of the mili- ‘tary authorities and of Congress that there ‘were disloyal members of that population, ‘whose number and strength could not be ‘precisely and quickly ascertained. —

“We cannot say that the war-making ‘branches of the Government did not have ground for believing that in a critical hour such persons could not readily be isolated and separately dealt with, and constituted a menace to the national defense and safety, which demanded that prompt and adequate measures be taken to guard against it.”

The court, however, rejected the decision of the United States District Judge in the Yasui case that the latter was a dual citizen, who, under international law, had elected to become a Japanese citizen by working for the Japanese consulate in Chicago.

The decision leaves untouched the constitutionality of detention of American citi- zens after evacuation. That issue is before Judge Michael J. Roche in the case of Mit- suye Endo, who last fall sought a writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court at San Francisco. Judge Roche deferred his decision until after the Supreme Court acted in the evacuation cases.

Attorney Wayne M. Collins of San Francisco filed amicus curiae briefs with the Supreme Court for the Northern California Branch of the Union in both the Hirabayashi and Yasui cases. He also handled the Korematsu case. The local branch of the Union is deeply indebted to Mr. Collins for his outstanding service to the cause of civil liberties.

Smith-Connally Act Will Cause Labor Strife

Passage of the Smith-Connally bill over President Roosevelt’s veto is a national dis- aster that can result only in strife in an area that has been remarkably free of con- flicts, except for the coal strike, during the ' past year and a half. Numerous civil liberties issues are bound to accompany any at-— tempted enforcement of the law.

The Civil Liberties Union opposed the law on the ground that there was “no practical necessity for it, that it was passed in the midst of a crisis, and that it establishes ominous precedents in public policy.”

The Union contends that the practical prohibition of the right to strike in indus- tries taken over by the government establishes ‘compulsory restraints which set dangerous precedents in principle, besides adding nothing in practice to-the present war-time powers of the government. While a limitation may be properly placed on the right to strike in war-time it should be done by voluntary action, not by imposing crim- inal penalties on leaders.

The prohibition of contributions to political campaigns is “indefensible and evident- ly inserted into an emergency measure as a precedent for establishing a permanent public policy.”’ Non-profit business associations “analogous to trade unions in the busi- ness field are not prohibited from making contributions in political campaigns. To single out labor unions for this prohibition is unwarranted discrimination.”

RFEW UPHELD

Southern California Branch Celebrates 20th Anniversary

-. Last month the Southern California Branch of the A.C.L.U. celebrated its twentieth anniversary. The branch grew .out of the longshoremen’s strike in 1923 when Upton Sinclair and several others were arrested on Liberty Hill, San Pedro, — for reading the Constitution’s guarantees of freedom. Sinclair and the others were held incommunicado for eighteen hours. As a result of that incident, a branch of the A.C.L.U. was started, and Dr. Clinton J. Taft was induced to become director— a post he has held ever since.

In a letter to Dr. Taft, read at the anniversary meeting, Ernest Besig, director of the Northern California branch, extended congratulations and commented that “it is a real achievement for the followers of any cause to stick together for twenty years and still love each other and the cause.” :

While paying tribute to the war-time activities of the Southern California Branch, Besig declared that the war “has brought some tough issues—issues over which men can readily find reasons to differ. Indeed, among erstwhile civil libertarians there are many advocates of a policy of putting civil liberties on ice for the duration, of sofe-pedaling and evading some of the less popular issues. But the American Civil Liberties Union, and its branches, deserves to survive only if it remains true to its purpose of defending, without intermission, the civil liberties of all without distinction. If the Union ever gets to the point of discriminating against clients on the basis of popularity or associations, then it is time for it to fold up.”

20-YEAR SENTENCE OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST REVERSED

Last month the 20-year sentence imposed by a court martial on Pvt. George C. Vance, Seventh Day Adventist was reversed and Vance was returned to duty. At first, the 20-year sentence was reduced to 5 years, but finally the reduced sentence was remitted.

Vance had been granted a non-combatant status by his draft board, but for some reason that is not entirely clear, he was assigned to a combat unit. Nevertheless, he was requested to carry a rifle on only one occasion during his five weeks on active duty.

On Saturday, January 30, however, Vance was ordered to attend the “Regimental Gymkhana.” He refused to perform any duties on the Sabbath Day (which is Saturday for Adventists). The court martial on February 25 followed.

The Northern California Branch of the A.C.L.U. and the Seventh-Day Adventist War Service Commission intervened in the case after the court martial.

Page 2

REFERENDUM SOUGHT ON RELIGIOUS LAW

Petitions are being circulated by the California Educational League for a referendum on the law adopted at the last regular session of the California Legislature providing for so-called released school time for religious instruction. Under the law, Boards of Education may adopt regulations permitting children to be excused four days per school month for religious instruction, and children may then be excused for such instruction “with the written consent of their parents or guardians.”

The law has been opposed by the local branch of the Union as being in conflict with the traditional doctrine of separation of Church and State, and specific provigions of the State Constitution. In particular, the law provides that absences of children for such instruction “shall not be deemed absence in computing average daily attendance,” and boards are required to keep attendance records of pupils at such religious schools.

The California Constitution provides that “No public money shall ever be appropriated for the support of any sectarian or denominational school, or any school not under the exclusive control of the officers of the public schools.” The Constitution also prohibits the Legislature, etc., from granting “anything to or in aid of any religious sect, church, creed or sectarian purpose.”

111,727 names are required on the peti| tions by August 8 if the issue is to go be- fore the voters at the general election in November, 1944. Some petitions, it has been announced, have already been filed with Secretary of State Frank M. Jordan.

UNION BACKS RACE-DISCRIMINATION , TESTS BY LATIN-AMERICANS

Following a visit to New York by. Prof. George I. Sanchez of the University ot Texas, the American Civil Liberties Union has agreed to assist in court tests of racial discrimination in the southwest against socalled Mexicans, who are for the most part American-born citizens of Spanish and Indian ancestry. Both law and practice in Texas, and in less degree in other southwestern states, deny to these Latin-Americans the right to vote in the Democratic primary, to serve on juries, to attend white schools, and to purchase land freely. The total population of Latin-Americans in the United States is 3,500,000, of whom over 1,000,000 live in Texas.

Prof. Sanchez, accompanied by M. C. Gonzales, San Antonio lawyer, 1s seeking support by national organizations im the east for local efforts not only to bring court cases but to strengthen the bonds between local groups of Latin-Americans and others interested in establishing their rights as American citizens.

/OKLA. APPEALS COURT AFFIRMS FORCED CONFESSION CONVICTION

A young Negro farmhand, W. D. Lyons, convicted in Oklahoma of a triple murder in January, 1940, in a trial based on a forced confession, has just been denied an appeal by the Oklahoma Criminal Court of Appeals. His alleged victims were his employer, Elmer Rogers, his wife and young gon. os Lyons was tortured by officers to extract a confession, according to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and was rushed through a preliminary hearing in a courtroom crowded with people worked up to anear-lynching spirit. Neither before nor during the trial did he have a lawyer. Two local lawyers assigned by the court refused and were excused.

An A.C.L.U. brief, filed in the Court of Appeals by Morris L. Ernst and Benjamin Kaplan, supporting the contentions of the N.A.A.C.P., declared that ‘apart from the alleged confessions, there is insufficient evidence in the record on which to base a criminal conviction.”

Fifty -Denaturalization Suits Set For Trial in San Francisco:

The Attorney General’s office has com.menced denaturalization proceedings in numerous communities (New York, Philadelphia, Newark, Fort Wayne, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco) against former Bund members, members of the Italian Ex Combattanti, and citizens with no particular affiliations who are alleged to be disloyal to the United States. In the U. 8. District Court in San Francisco on July 20, twenty-five Bund cases will go to trial. In all, more than fifty suits have been filed in this area.

In each case, the defendant is charged with having secured his citizenship fraudu- lently. It will be claimed that although the defendants took oaths asserting their at- tachment to the principles of the Constitution, they held mental reservations and never did intend to become loyal United — States citizens.

In the Bund cases, for example, the government contends such membership is in- consistent with an oath of loyalty to the United States. The difficulty is that many of the defendants joined the Bund many years after they were naturalized. Nevertheless, the government is using such membership as evidence of fraudulent intent at the time of na

turalization. Most of those against whom proceedings have been commenced in San Francisco have been excluded from the Pacific Coast by the Military as “dangerous or potentially dangerous” citizens. Though they now reside in many States of the Union, the | suits have nevertheless been filed here. Indeed, the F.B.I. has been diligent in securing statements from unsuspecting defendants saying they still regard their residences to be in Northern California. Of course, if their homes are no longer here, then the government should have filed its suits where the defendants reside, and where it would be more convenient for them to defend themselves.

The proceedings are civil in their nature. Under an agreement between the Military and the Attorney General’s office, the defendants who were excluded from the area were permitted to return 30 days before the — trial in order to prepare their cases.

If a defendant did secure his citizenship fraudulently, the A.C.L.U.. will not inter-— vene. In all of the cases, the Union has decided to wait until after the trials to see just what evidence is presented by the government. Obviously, if unpopular minori- ties can lose their citizenship because of © acts and statements made long after na- turalization, then the citizenship of all naturalized citizens is placed in jeopardy. The San Francisco trials will bear close watching.

CIRCULAR LETTER URGES DRAFTING OF MINISTERS

Robert Harold

culating an open letter to the Congress of the United States protesting against the exemption of ministers and divinity students-from service in the armed forces under the Selective Training and Service Act. Scott argues that such exemption constitutes a nullification of the first article of the Bill of Rights forbidding Congress to make any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”

“Doubtless many, perhaps all, such men would refuse, on religious or other grounds, to serve in our armed forces,” says Scott; “but in that case they should, I say, be treated exactly the same as all other draft registrants who for the same reason have made this refusal.”

It has been reported to the Union that an effort is being made to bar the petition from the mails. Apparently, the only ground for such action would be disagreement with the opinions expressed in the petition. Under such circumstances, it is very unlikely that the Post Office Department will take any steps against Mr. Scott.

Supreme Court Denies Whitney Bowles Rehearing

The Supreme Court on June 7 refused to rehear the case of Whitney Bowles, 24, of Newfoundland, New Jersey, convicted for violation of the draft act. As in its original decision against Bowles, the Court failed to rule on the question raised in the lower courts—whether a conscientious objector must submit to induction before he can challenge a claimed erroneous classification.

The lower courts held that a review of classification could be had only after a registrant has been inducted and has sued out a writ of habeas corpus. Bowles argued that such a procedure would “require that he submit to participation in the very action from which he claims exemption.” The Supreme Court, in hearing the appeal, upheld the ruling of Selective Service Director Hershey that Bowles had been properly classified.

Bowles, who is free on bail after having served a few months of a three-year sen- tence, will be returned to the federal prison at Danbury. Scott of Los Gatos is cir-

WEATHERBEE AND STROBEL RELEASED FROM ARMY

Herbert L. Weatherbee, a Jehovah’s Witness who received a sentence of life im- prisonment at hard labor for refusing to obey the command of an officer to salute the flag, has been discharged from the Army. ‘

Despite his claim of religious opposition to war, Weatherbee was inducted at Santa Barbara and shipped to Ft. MacArthur, where he refused to wear a uniform or submit to any military orders. The court martial sentence was reversed by the Judge Advocate General after widespread protests. :

Ernie Strobel, another Jehovah’s Witness, was released from the Veterans’ Hospital at Palo Alto last month after having been honorably discharged from the United States Army.

Strobel, assaulted and beaten at Ft. MacArthur by officers and soldiers, for refusal to put on a uniform, was charged with a violation of the Articles of War and held for court martial because of his refusal to wear a uniform. After protests, the court martial proceedings were dismissed and Strobel was released.

INDUCTION OF CHURCH OF NAZA; RENE MINISTER POSTPONED

The Selective Service System, on the petition of the Northern California Branch of the A.C.L.U., has postponed the induction of Robert Earl Phillips, an ordained minister of the Church of the Nazarene, and has promised that ‘‘a further study will be made of his case.”

Phillips’ claims as a minister were duly recognized by his St. Louis, Mo., draft board in 1941. Last November, however, Phillips came to the coast to organize a church at San Bruno, California. Pending the organization of the church, he worked in the shipyards for almost 2!4 months. Finally, about March 15 last, regular services were started under Phillips’ direction and have continued ever since.

When Phillips went to work in the shipyards, his draft board at once reclassified him 1-A, and the Appeal Board turned down his appeal. Finally, he was ordered inducted on April 28. Since Phillips is now 38 years of age it is unlikely that the action of the Missouri boards will be sustained.

A. C. LU, Reports Fewer Sedition Cases In World War II

In a report on war-time prosecutions for allegedly subversive speech and publication the American Civil Liberties Union notes fewer sedition cases in World War II.

“There were only 45 federal cases of all sorts up to May, 1948,” the report states, “as against a total of almost 1,000 such cases in the first World War. Approximately 200 persons were involved in these cases, as against over 1,100 in the World War I corresponding period.”

About 125 convicted persons are in prison, and a few more are in jail awaiting © trial. The largest group are members of obscure religious sects, convicted for conspiracy to obstruct the Selective Service Act; the next largest are members of the German-American Bund.

The government has invoked the Espionage Act in 23 cases involving 95 persons; 30 persons have been convicted, 15 released, and 50 are on trial or awaiting it. Three cases, in which. prosecutions were dropped, were brought under the peacetime sedition act.

Early in the war there were a few prosecutions under state sedition laws. Up to the present the Post Office Department has revoked the second-class mailing rights of 6 publications and barred 15 issues of 8 publications from the mails for violation of the Espionage Act.

The relatively small number of sedition cases, the report points out, is apparently due to the slight opposition to the war, the general absence of hysteria, and the in- telligent application by the Department of Justice of the clear and present danger test laid down by the Supreme Court in the last year.

NO CRIME TO OPPOSE. SALUTE TO THE FLAG

A Mississippi war-time law passed in 1942 prohibiting among other things, the dissemination of teachings tending ‘‘to create an attitude of stubborn refusal to salute, honor or respect the flag’”’ or “calculated to encourage ... disloyalty to the government,’ was declared unconstitutional by the U. S. Supreme Court on June 15. The case involved several Jehovah’s Witnesses convicted for statements to civilians deprecating the war effort, and: distributing pamphlets explaining the religious basis for their refusal to support the war or the flag salute.

The A.C.L.U. contested the statute in the legislature and in the Mississippi courts, filing a brief in support of the Witnesses in the State Supreme Court which divided 3 to 3. A brief was also filed in the U. S. Supreme Court signed by Missis-sippi and New York lawyers.

Said the court, in an opinion by Justice Roberts, “If the state cannot constrain one to violate his conscientious religious conviction by saluting the national emblem, then certainly it cannot punish him for imparting his views on the subject to his fellows and exhorting them to accept those views.”

“The statute as construed in these cases,” the court pointed out, also ‘‘makes it a criminal offense to communicate to others views and opinions respecting governmental policies and prophesies concerning the future of our own and other nations. As applied to the appellants it punishes them although what they communicated is not claimed or shown to have been done with an evil or sinister purpose, to have advocated or incited subversive action against the nation or state, or to have threatened any clear and present danger to our institutions or our government. What these appellants communieated were their beliefs and opinions concerning domestic measures and trends in national and world affairs. Under our decisions criminal sanctions cannot be im- posed for such communications.”

Page 8 Supreme Court Outlaws Compulsory Flag Salute

The compulsory flag salute issue, which has plagued the United States since 1935, has finally come to a satisfactory conclusion. On June 14, the United States Supreme Court, in the case of West Virginia v. Walter Barnette, by a 6 to 38 vote, overruled the famous Gobitis decision of 1940, and held that compulsory flag-salute regulations for public school children invade the First Amendment to our Constitution. Justices Roberts, Reed and Frankfurter dissented. The latter, who wrote the prevailing opinion in the Gobitis case, expressed his views in a lengthy and vigorJustice Jackson wrote the majority opinion, and two short concurring opinions were filed, one signed by Justices Black and Douglas, and the other by Justice Murphy.

Broad Question Answered

In the Gobitis case, now overruled, the court rejected a claim that the religious liberty of Jehovah’s Witnesses, who find Biblical objections to flag-saluting, was violated. In the instant case, the court passed upon the broader question “whether such a ceremony so touching matters of opinion and political attitude may be imposed,’ not alone on religious objectors, but “upon the individual by official authority under powers committed — to any political organization under our Constitution.” — It answered, in effect, that no civilian in the United States can be forced to salute the flag and give the pledge of allegiance.

The court rejects the notion of the Gobitis decision that the government may seek ‘national unity’ by .compulsory measures. ‘‘Authority here is to be controlled by public opinion,’ says Justice Jackson, “not public opinion by author-.

iyi

Sphere of Intellect and Spirit Invaded

“We think,” said the court, ‘“‘the action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute and pledge transcends constitutional limitations on their power and in- vades the sphere of intellect and spirit which it is the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from all official control.”

Briefs upholding the contentions of Jehovah’s Witnesses were filed by the A.C.L.U. and the Bill of Rights Committee of the American Bar Association. The pene Legion filed a brief in opposiion.

It is estimated that over 500 school children have been expelled throughout the United States for refusal to salute. In California, expulsions have occurred particularly in small, Legion dominated communities. In larger communities such as San Francisco, Berekley, Oakland, San Jose and Los Angeles, compulsory flagsalute regulations were not adopted. At the 1939 session of the State Legislature, efforts of partrioteers to enact a compulsory flag-salute law were defeated after a strenuous fight. Governor Olson finally vetoed one measure that reached his desk, permitting local school boards to enact flag-salute regulations — something small-town boards were doing anyway.

Local Branch Handled Gabrielli Case

Sacramento was one of the few large communities in the country that adopted a compulsory flag-salute regulation. In consequence of its regulation, nine-yearold Charlotte Gabrielli was suspended from school on October 25, 1935, in one of the first Jehovah’s Witness flag-salute cases to arise in the country.

The Northern California Branch of the A.C.L.U. offered its help to the child’s parents, and, supported by the late Judge Rutherford, who was then the leader of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a test suit was filed by Attorney Wayne M. Collins on April 28, 1936. Superior Judge Peter J. Shields of Sacramento ordered the child reinstated, but his action was reversed by the higher courts, and the United States Supreme Court finally dismissed the case on April 17, 1989 “for want of jurisdiction,” —which was another way of saying that no federal question was involved. The West Virginia decision, however, means that there was a federal question in the Gabrielli case, a question affecting every | civilian in the country. Henceforth, no civilian can be compelled to salute the flag or pledge allegiance thereto.

Burns Valley School : Board Capitulates

Three weeks before the Supreme Court decided against compulsory flag salutes, the District Board of the Burns Valley School District, Lake County, capitulated in the cases of Robert Drey and June Whitney. The County Board of Education had ordered the expelled children reinstated, on condition that they stand at attention during the salute, but the District Board defied the decision, which the State law declares is final.

Finally, the Northern California Branch of the A.C.L.U., through Attorney Clarence E. Rust of Oakland, filed separate applications for writs of mandate in the Superior Court of Lake County. Alternative writs were signed by Judge Jones on May 22nd, returnable on June 3rd.

Copies of the writs were served on all three members of the District Board, as well as the Principal of the school. A couple of days later, the parents of the children received copies of the following letter addressed to the principal of the school by the Clerk of the District Board:

“You are hereby directed to allow Robert Drey and June Whitney to resume their studies as pupils of the Burns Valley School.

“Also, you. will not require them to salute the Flag of the United States of America, but they are to stand at attention while such salute is being rendered.

“By order of the District Board of the Burns Valley School.”

More Oklahoma Criminal : Syndicalist Cases Dropped

The criminal syndicalist charges against nine Communists for membership in the Party, growing out of the 1940 election campaign, have been dropped by the prosecution at Oklahoma City. The dismissal of the charges followed a decision a few months ago of the highest court in the state reversing three ten-year sentences for mere membership.

Five of the nine are still held on similar charges based on the sale of literature. It is expected that if the Court of Appeals reverses the conviction of Robert Wood for the sale of Communist literature in the only remaining case on appeal, the charges against the other four will be dismissed.

The Civil Liberties Union filed briefs as friend of the court on both charges in the © Court of Appeals.

TENNESSEE ANTI-POLL TAX BILL HELD UNCONSTITUTIONA

Although a bill repealing the poll tax was recently passed by the Tennessee leg- islature, its constitutionality has been questioned in the first court test. A chancery court held that the Tennessee Constitution requires the payment of a poll tax as a prerequisite to voting and that only a Constitutional amendment can abolish it.

An appeal to the higher courts will be taken on the ground that the Constitution of the State does not require any specific tax, and that the poll tax must be expressly provided for.

Page 4

American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 216 Pine Street, San Francisco, 4, Calif., by the Northern California Branch of The American Civil Liberties Union. Phone: EXbrook 1816 ERNEST BESIG Editor Entered as second-class matter, July 31, 1941, at the Post Office at San Francisco, California, under the Act of March 3, 1879.

Subscription Rates—Seventy-five Cents a Year. Ten Cents per Copy.

Arizona Places a Boycott on Japanese Transactions

The State of Arizona has passed a law which limits business dealings with Japanese. It requires that notices of ‘‘business relationship or transaction”? be published not less than three times in a newspaper of general circulation, and that at least ten days before consummation of the proposed transaction there shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State a copy of the notice accompanied by detailed information regarding the transaction. Such restrictions apply to all transactions covering real and personal property ‘“‘except goods, wares and merchandise for personal consumption.”

The act applies only to transactions with “a person whose movements are restricted by operation of law or by any executive or other order authorized by law, or... a person who is not eligible for citizenship.”

While the law was admittedly directed against the Japanese, it was so hastily and so poorly drawn that it would be a crime to do business with any person in the armed forces or any person in prison, without conforming to its provisions, because all such persons have their “movements restricted” either by operation of law or by some order. And, it has been asserted, that it applies to all persons in Arizona, because under war-time conditions, all persons have their movements restricted in one form or another.

While goods for personal consumption are exempted from the statute, personal services are not. Thus the dentist, the doctor, the oculist, the lawyer, the barber, the bootblack, etc., may not extend services to Japanese without fulfilling the burdensome requirements of the statute. And no transaction can be completed in less than fourteen days.

The Standard Oil Company was recently fined $1,000 for selling $9.25 worth of gasoline to a Japanese. More recently, four Salt River valley produce firms were charged with violating the law in hiring Japanese evacuee laborers.

A test suit is being prepared by the Japanese American Citizens League in which the A.C.L.U. will co-operate.

REVIEW OF “WHITE PRIMARY” CASE CASE GRANTED BY SUPREME COURT

A review of the now-famous Texas “white primary”. case, in which Lonnie Smith, a Negro voter, claimed denial of his right to vote by exclusion from the Democratic Primary in 1940, was granted by the Supreme Court on June 7. Smith was represented by counsel for the N.A.A.C.P.

The Court also allowed filing of a brief as friend of the court by the American Civil Liberties Union. The Union brfef will contend that Smith’s constitutional right to vote has been violated, pointing to the Supreme Court ruling in a case involving the Louisiana primaries. There the court held that exclusion from the primary is in effect a denial of the right to vote when the primary is a necessary part of the electoral process and when one-party control makes the primary the actual election.

The Union brief in the Court of Appeals, signed by George Clifton Edwards of Dallas, and Arthur Garfield Hays of New York, claimed that both these conditions exist in Texas.

Membership in An Organization No Ground For Denaturalization

In a 5 to 3 decision the U. S. Supreme Court on June 21 reversed the Circuit Court of Appeals at San Francisco, which had sustained the revocation of citizenship of William Schneiderman, secretary of the Communist Party of California, for alleged fraud in obtaining his naturalization papers in 1927. The case had been twice argued in the Supreme Court by Wendell Willkie, Schneiderman’s volunteer attorney.

The court held in an opinion by Justice Frank Murphy that citizenship once acquired by naturalization cannot be revoked for mere membership in an organization, even though the organization’s aims may be subject to two interpretations, ‘‘the one reprehensible and a bar to naturalization and the other permissible.’”’ The court held that the government must show that the individual personally advocated the “reprehensible” interpretation.

The court did not pass upon the question of whether the Communist Pare Ge this time advocates the overthrow of government by force and violence. Justice Murphy said: “The Court has never passed upon the question of whether the Party does so advocate and it is unnecessary for us to do so now. A tenable conclusion. . . is that the Party in 1927 desired to achieve its purpose by peaceful and democratic means, and as a theoretical matter justified the use of force and violence only as a method of preventing an attempted forcible counter-overthrow once the Party had obtained control in a peaceful manner, or as a method of last resort to enforce. the majority will if at some indefinite future time because of peculiar circumstances constitutional or peaceful channels were no longer open.”’

A minority decision by Chief Justice Stone held that the basic question was whether Schneiderman acted as one “attached to the principles of the Constitution.” He held that there was evidence that “the Communist Party organizations advocated the overthrow of capitalistic governments by revolution, to be accomplished, if need be, by force of arms.” He held that Schneiderman was thoroughly familiar with the Party program and literature and sought to advance them, and concluded he ‘“‘was not entitled to the citizenship he procured because he was not atee to the principles of the Constituion.”

The case doubtless will dispose of similar suits pending against other naturalized citizens who are members of the Communist Party. It will probably have some bearing on the many denaturalization proceedings brought by the government against members of the German-American Bund.

The A.C.L.U., although it did not participate in the case, publicly opposed the government’s contentions and offered its assistance to the defense, based on its long opposition to revocation of citizenship for mere membership in an organization or for political beliefs.

EAST ST. LOUIS, MO., NEGROES SENTENCED FOR SEDITION

Two Negro leaders of the Pacific Movement of the Eastern World, East St. Louis, Mo., were recently sentenced to prison for propaganda which the court said had an “unvarying purpose to put the interests of the colored races above the interests of the United States government, and to put Japan, as the alleged friend and leader of the colored peoples, above the United States in the minds and hearts of the members.’ Nevertheless, “‘little real harm was done by the defendants except to defraud their followers.” a

Highlights From the

Here. 3

minating dissenters. ity of the graveyard.

faith therein.

. we are dealing with a compulsion of students to declare a belief. They are not merely made acquainted with the flag salute so that they may be. informed as to what it is or even what it means.

‘slow and easily neglected route to aroused loyalties constitutionally may be short- cut by substituting a compulsory salute and slogan.

.To sustain the compulsory flag salute we are required to say that a Bill of Rights which guards the individual’s right to speak his own mind, left it open to public authorities to compel him to utter what is not in his mind

Those who begin coercive elimination of dissent soon find themselves exterCompulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanim

To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous instead of a compulsory routine is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds. = 8

... freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.

If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official,

high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, re- ligion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their

We think the action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute and

Flag Salute Decision.

The issue here is whether this pledge transcends constitutional limitations on their power and invades the sphere of intellect and spirit which it is the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from all official control.

Words uttered under coercion are proof of loyalty to nothing but self-interest.

Neither our domestic tranquility in peace nor our martial effort in war depend on compelling little children to participate in a ceremony which ends in nothing . for them but a fear of spiritual condemnation.

Any spark of love for country which may be generated in a child or his associates by forcing him to make what is to him an empty gesture and recite words wrung from him contrary to his religious bzliefs is overshadowed by the desirability of preserving freedom of conscience to the full. It is that freedom and the example of persuasion, not in force and compulsion, that the real unity of America lies.