Search

In this paper the author attempts to show how the first Smith Act case arose in the U.S., a case which because of its reasoning has had great legal and political significance not only for those convicted under the Act but for all those interested in the right of expression as well. The major anti-sedition legislation operating to limit political expression in the period included the Smith Act of 1940, the Internal Security Act of 1950, the Communist Control Act of 1954, and similar state legislation. Such legislation, aimed directly at the suppression or restriction of subversive activities or groups, must be viewed in the context of the whole body of law available to the government for protection against treason, sedition, espionage, sabotage, and similar acts. The Smith Act defined three offenses, knowingly advocating the overthrow of government by force or violence, knowingly helping to organize a society that engages in such advocacy or becoming a member of such a society, and conspiring with others to commit either of the first two offenses.

The article offers new briefs related to military issues in the U.S. The six Fort Monmouth employees had been dismissed in their legal case by the order of Judge Pine in New Jersey. The government has agreed to restore their jobs, security and civil service rights. The Department of Defense has ordered to declassify military documents before 1946 to help research and history.

The article discusses the reasons why Great Britain is affected by the American loyalty-security policy. The author states that the loyalty-security program of the U.S. resulted in action within Great Britain. He uses as an example the use of British police officers to seek evidence to support the indictment of Owen Lattimore. He asserts that the loyalty-security program has limited British access to Americans and to the U.S. He also argues that the loyalty-security program affects the climate of the Atlantic alliance and the quality of American foreign policy.

This experiment provided three possible alternatives in response to social influence: i.e., agreement with a majority, agreement with a minority, or independence from both. Forty female undergraduates, in groups of five, initially made perceptual judgments of unambiguous stimuli in a modified Crutchfield apparatus with three response alternatives, In the first response position, the S received apparent agreement from either three or from only one of the other four during the initial phase. In each group the deviate from the majority judgment had been described as either experienced or inexperienced at the task. in a second phase, all Ss were placed in the last response position for judgments of highly ambiguous stimuli. For 15 critical trials, they saw the majority continue to pick one alternative, and the deviate another. On these trials the S could agree with the majority, with the deviate, or with neither. The results showed no major effect for the majority vs. minority agreement. However, the presence of an experienced deviate did lead to decreased agreement with the majority, but without more agreement with the deviate. Instead, the presence of an experienced deviate significantly increased independence from all the others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Groups of Ss ranging in size from four to six read the Landy and Aronson (3) case concerning negligent automobile homicide. Each S within each group received an identical version of the case involving either an attractive or unattractive defendant. Ss were asked individually to sentence the defendant after reading the case. Then each S was asked to make public his sentence to fellow group members, as well as a brief statement of the reasons for his sentence. Following this, all Ss were asked to discuss the case. After discussing the case, each S then rendered a postdiscussion sentence. Results indicate that (a) prior to group discussion Ss in the unattractive defendant treatment sentenced the defendant to a significantly longer prison term than Ss in the attractive defendant treatment; (b) after group discussion there was a significant shift toward leniency in the unattractive defendant treatment, while no significant change in the attractive defendant treatment; and (c) the postdiscussion sentences of Ss in the unattractive defendant treatment did not significantly differ from those in the attractive defendant treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on various lawsuits filed by the parents of retarded children in Pennsylvania, to claim their childrens' right to receive free public education in the 1970s. Reasons behind the adoption of a legal procedure by parents in claiming the rights; Implications of denying public education for retarded children; Demand of the parents for the implementation of a 'zero-reject education' program in the state.

Evaluates oral argument of Thurgood Marshall and John W. Davis in the school segregation cases in the United States in 1952 to 1953. Characteristics of oral argument in cases before the U.S. Supreme Court; Difficulties of achieving clarity during argument before the Supreme Court; Requirements for adaptability during argument before the Supreme Court.

Looks at the incident wherein U.S. abolitionist John Brown delivered his courtroom speech in his trial over treason in Charlestown, Virginia on November 2, 1859. Facts of Brown's case; Description of the courtroom scene at the day of his speech; Physical description of Brown.

Focuses on accusations faced by U.S. Senator Joseph R. McCarthy by the Army regarding the investigation of communists in the Army. Evidence given by the Army in support of the allegations; Reasons given by McCarthy in his defense; Challenges faced by the televised presentation of the hearing.

In this article, the application of physiography and geography to public business is illustrated by many features of the boundary suit between the States of Michigan and Wisconsin which was acted upon by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1926. The case demonstrates how lawyers, geographers, engineers, legislators, soldiers, Indian guides and pilots and members of other occupations and professions can work together. It shows some of the simple uses of maps. It reveals the elementary nature of what constitutes material evidence in the highest judicial body.

The article reports on the result of the sessions of the fourth conference of the U.S. National Commission for Unesco. Unesco was charged of being an organization which is Communist-influenced, seeks to undermine American loyalty, is anti-religious, or seeks to indoctrinate American students with subversive doctrines. It was charged by nationalist and super-patriotic groups within the U.S. Unesco was found to be democratic in its operation, impartial, and anxious to promote tolerance among religious groups. President Eisenhower and Under-Secretary of State, Walter Bedell Smith, endorsed the organization after the results of the study were revealed.

The article focuses on the development of the loyalty charges made against scientist Edward U. Condon by the House Un-American Activities Committee in the U.S. After the hearing, the transcript showed clearly that none of these accusations were substantiated by any facts throwing doubt on Condon's loyalty and reliability. Notwithstanding, committee's annual report recommended that he should not be confided with access to any classified information in the future because of his tendency for associating with persons disloyal or of questionable loyalty. Other scientists who were charged with disloyalty include professor Linus Pauling, of the California Institute of Technology and Walter Gellhorn, professor of law at Columbia University.

The article reports on several developments related to security in the U.S. According to sources, the Shachtman decision, which was rendered on June 23, 1955 by the U.S. Court of Appeals, established that freedom to travel is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court ruled that the Loyalty Review Board did not have the right to post-audit after Peters had been twice cleared by boards of the agency where he was employed, thereby ending the Peters case. Moreover, the Senate passed on June 27, 1955 that the Humphrey-Stennis bill to set up a bipartisan committee of 12.

The article presents news briefs concerning decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court on appeals of individuals convicted of national security violations. The Court refused to review the appeal of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg who have been sentenced to death for giving information on atomic energy to Soviet agents during World War II. Morton Sobell who was charged with the same offense and sentenced to 30 years' incarceration was also denied review.