CONTENTS Baldwin, Cuthbert S., attorney, of New Orleans, La.. Rhyne, Charles S., chairman; Harold J. Gallagher, and Calvin Cory, members, special committee on the instant bill, of the American Dawkins, Ben C., United States district judge, western district of Hayes, Johnson J., United States district judge, middle district Parker, Judge John J., United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Proposed amendment to a bill to prohibit the picketing of courts___. Administrative Office of the United States Courts.. Supplementary report of the special committee of the American III TO PROHIBIT THE PICKETING OF COURTS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 1949 UNITED STATES SENATE, JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEES ON THE JUDICIARY OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:30 a. m. in room 424, Senate Office Building, Senator Frank P. Graham presiding. Present: Senator Graham (presiding), Representatives Sam Hobbs, Martin Gorski, J. Frank Wilson, Earl C. Michener, and William M. McCulloch. Present also: Representative Hale Boggs and Robert B. Young, professional staff member. Senator GRAHAM. The meeting will please come to order. Gentlemen, Senator Eastland and Senator Jenner have not yet appeared, but I think we should proceed and use the time available. This is a hearing on S. 1681, introduced by Senator Ellender of Louisiana. The title of the bill is "To prohibit the picketing of courts." I will ask that this bill be inserted in the proceedings of the committee at this point. (The bill is as follows:) [S. 1681, 81st Cong., 1st sess.] A BILL To prohibit the picketing of courts Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That chapter 73 of title 18 of the United States Code is hereby amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "SEC. 1507. The picketing or parading in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by a judge, juror, witness, or court officer with the intent of interfering with, obstructing or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, is hereby declared an offense and any such person or persons so picketing or parading shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." Senator GRAHAM. There is also a House bill (H. R. 3766) introduced by Mr. Boggs of Louisiana, also entitled "A Bill to Prohibit the Picketing of Courts." (The bill is as follows:) [H. R. 3766, 81st Cong., 1st sess.] A BILL To prohibit the picketing of courts Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That chapter 73 of title 18 of the United States Code is hereby amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "SEC. 1507. The picketing or parading in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by a judge, 1 juror, witness, or court officer with the intent of interfering with, obstructing or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, is hereby declared an offense and any such person or persons so picketing or parading shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." Representative HOBBS. Senator, at this time I should like to present to you the members of the House subcommittee: Mr. Gorski, Mr. J. Frank Wilson of Texas, Mr. Michener of Michigan, Mr. McCulloch of Ohio. (Dixie Gilmer and Chauncey W. Reed, also members of the subcommittee, were not present.) Senator GRAHAM. We are glad that your associates are here today. Representative HOBBS. We are glad to be here, Senator. Senator GRAHAM. I might say that I am the freshman of the Senate, but since my colleagues are not here, with your approval, I will go ahead. Representative HOBBS. We want you to. Senator GRAHAM. The special committee of the American Bar Association is here, and we will now be glad to hear from that committee. Mr. Charles S. Rhyne is the chairman. Mr. Rhyne, will you give us your testimony, please? STATEMENTS OF CHARLES S. RHYNE, CHAIRMAN; HAROLD J. GALLAGHER, AND CALVIN CORY, MEMBERS, SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE INSTANT BILL OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION Mr. RHYNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, our committee is a special committee appointed by the board of governors of the American Bar Association to support this legislation. It is composed of Mr. Gallagher of New York and Mr. Cory of Nevada and myself as chairman. We were instructed by the board of governors to appear before you and present their view that this legislation should be passed. First of all, I would like, if I may, to read a resolution unanimously adopted by the house of delegates of the American Bar Association of February 1949, which supports this legislation in principle. This resolution provides as follows: Whereas this country has a government of laws and not of men, and in the orderly administration of justice it is necessary that our courts be impartial and independent in the application and construction of the laws, and free from any interference or acts which will result in a disrespect for law and constitutional government under law; and Whereas several instances of mass picketing of courts have recently occurred: Be it Resolved, That the American Bar Association condemns the picketing of courts as an interference with the orderly administration of justice, the purpose of which can only be to influence, intimidate and coerce the courts in connection with matters prospective or pending before them, and such picketing constitutes a clear and present danger, as well as a major threat, to the integrity and independence of the judiciary and to our form of government; be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts with the request that this matter be brought to the attention of the Judicial Conference of the United States. I have the report of the special committee, which I will read at this time, if I may, since it consists of only four pages. I believe that I can read it much better than I can summarize it. Senator GRAHAM. We would be glad to have you read it, Mr. Rhyne. Mr. RHYNE. Thank you, sir. [Reading:] This special committee was appointed by the Honorable Frank E. Holman, president of the American Bar Association, on May 17, 1949, pursuant to action taken by the board of governors of that association authorizing the creation of the special committee to represent the association in support of S. 1681 and H. R. 3766. These bills will provide amendments to chapter 73 of title 18 of the United States Code by adding at the end thereof the following new section: "SEC. 1507. The picketing or parading in or near a building housing a court of the United States or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by a judge, juror, witness, or court officer, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, is hereby declared an offense and any such person or persons so picketing or parading shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both." The special committee has made a study of these bills and of the evils they are intended to remedy. It is the opinion of this committee that the above-quoted legislation should be enacted into law for the following reasons: The practice of picketing courts is of recent origin and, so far as this committee is aware, has been employed solely in connection with proceedings involving alleged Communist Party members or Communist sympathizers. At the time of the opening of the current trial of Communist Party leaders in the Federal district court in New York City some 5 months ago, our newspapers carried accounts of the picketing conducted by large crowds outside the court building. Similar occurrences took place at the Federal district court in Los Angeles last winter during contempt proceedings arising out of an investigation of Communist Party activities. As an indication of the situation thus created, this committee is informed that large crowds, sometimes hundreds, paraded around and picketed the Federal building carrying picket signs, passing out literature and even surging into the building in large numbers, overcrowding the courtroom and corridors and making it next to impossible for persons having legitimate business to go where they were required to be. In addition, the residence of the judge was picketed. When argument was being heard in this Los Angeles case in the Court of Appeals in San Francisco, not only was the building picketed, but a sound-truck was employed outside the building and created so much noise that it seriously interfered with the ability to hear the proceedings inside the building, requiring the court to dispatch the marshal to put an end to the noise. It can readily be seen that such activities, if allowed to go unchecked, can detract immeasurably from the dignity befitting a judicial proceeding. The passage of this legislation will prevent interference with the courts by picketing crowds, and allow all persuasion of the courts to remain in the hands of those to whom it properly belongs, namely, counsel of the parties' choice, and in the place where it belongs, within the courtroom. * The present authority of Federal courts to deal with picketing outside their doors through their contempt power is somewhat uncertain. If the authority exists, it is contained in 18 U. S. C. 401, which provides that their power to punish for contempt is limited to "such contempt of its authority and none other, as misbehavior of any person in their presence, or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice * *"" Where the actions of the picketers physically interfere with the court, through noise, confusion or otherwise, it would seem that the above statute is applicable. In the case of Savin, Petitioner, 131 U. S. 267, the Supreme Court stated that "there may be misbehavior not in the immediate presence of the court, but outside of and in the vicinity of the building in which the court is held which, on account of its disorderly character, would actually interrupt the court, being in session, in the conduct of its business, and consequently obstruct the administration of justice.' But for the reasons stated, the attempt to influence the decisions of the court through picketing, parading and similar manifestations, even though peaceful, should not be sanctioned. The American Bar Association is informed that some Federal judges feel the contempt statute gives them the authority to deal with picketing, while other Federal judges feel that legislation is desirable, to clarify their authority. The remaining relevant statutes are found in 18 U. S. C. 1501-1506 which relate to the obstruction of justice. These sections make it an offense "to corruptly or by threats of force or by threatening letter or commotion-influence, obstruct or impede, or endeavor to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice. The problem is whether picketing is within those terms. * * |