*1 UNITED STATES. SCHNEIDERMAN v. 9, 12, Argued Reargued 1942. 1943. No. 2. November March June Decided *2 King Mrs. Willkie, whom Carol with Mr. Wendell L. briefs, peti- Mr. M. Owen were on Carl tioner. Attorney with Assistant Fahy, whom
Solicitor General Provost, Ford Berge, A. John and Messrs. Oscar General briefs, were on the for the Baecher and Richard S. Salant United States. behalf American M. filed a brief on of
Pearl Hart Born, amicus Foreign Committee for Protection curiae, urging reversal. Murphy opinion delivered
Mr. Justice Court. here brought certiorari, this 314 U. S.
We case on importance possible its relation to because its the natu- question is whether thought. freedom Com- member of the ralization admitted petitioner, States, was aside properly set munist years granted. twelve after was by the courts below some that our rela- minority with agree We our brethren gov- its Russia, regarding as our views tions with as well Communism immaterial ernment and the merits Congress is with what case. Our concern a decision tsD i—> O and whether the Government by certain statutes
meant its case under them. proved has carry out will of high duty it is Con- While our performance duty in the of this we should have a gress, jealous regard rights petitioner. for the We should guided permits judgment by let so far as the law our our spirit of freedom and tolerance nation founded, by blessings was a desire to secure the liberty thought all upon and action to those whom the right of American been citizenship has conferred stat- ute, as well as to the born. certainly native And we Congress presume should motivated these lofty principles. directly rights
We are only concerned of this surrounding circumstances his natu- *3 ralization, but we should not overlook the fact that we are heterogeneous a In people. larger of some our cities a majority of the school children are par- the of offspring only generation, ents one if far, from removed the steerage immigrant ship, children of those who sought refuge in the new from cruelty world the and op- pression of the old, where men have been burned at the stake, imprisoned, and driven in into exile countless num- bers for their political and religious they beliefs. Here have hoped to achieve political status in a as citizens free in world which men privileged to think and act and speak according to their convictions, without fear of punishment or further long exile so keep the they peace and obey the law.
This proceeding begun was 30, on June 1939, under the provisions of § 15 of the Act 1906, of June 34 29, Stat. 596, to petitioner’s cancel granted certificate of citizenship in 1927. gives This section the United the right States duty to set aside and cancel certificates of citi- on zenship the ground of “fraud” or on the ground that
121 charged complaint procured.”1 they “illegally were in that illegally procured had certificate been naturalization, and of not, was the time his at “had preceding his naturalization during years the five principles as, person attached to not behaved well disposed of Constitution the United States States,2 but good happiness of the United order and times, respondent during fact all said truth be- of and affiliated [petitioner] a member was or- of certain in and supported lieved part section read proceeding 1 At time was started this as follows: attorneys for
“It States district duty shall be the of the United Immigration Nat- respective districts, or the Commissioner Naturali- Immigration and Deputy uralization or Commissioner pro- therefor, to institute zation, upon showing good cause affidavit in the aliens having jurisdiction to naturalize ceedings any court may at the judicial reside the nаturalized citizen district can- setting aside and bringing suit, purpose time for the on the or ground of fraud celing citizenship on the certificate procured citizenship illegally ground certificate of that such C. 405. ...” S.U. § National- 338 of in substance provision is continued This § 1137, 1158, C. ity 8 U. S. Act of 54 Stat. § provided: Section 4 of the Act appear satisfaction It made to “Fourth. shall be preceding immediately admitting any citizenship that court alien to application continuously resided within the date his he has Territory least, and years five at within the State *4 United States year least, dur- where court the time held one at and that such is at character, good ing man moral at- that time he behaved as a of has States, of the principles the of Constitution United tached to the good same. disposed happiness and of the In and the order well testimony of least two applicant, the oath of the the at addition to residence, States, of United as to the facts witnesses, citizens of the Constitu- principles character, and moral attachment name, required, place residence, and occu- tion be the shall pation in the 34 Stat. each shall be set forth record.” witness 598; 8 C. U. S. §
T—i <M co ganizations (Communist) known then as the Workers (Communist) Young of America and the Workers League opposed were America, whose principles of the Constitution of United States advised, the Gov- taught advocated overthrow of ernment, Constitution and of the United States laws force and violence.” The complaint charged also fraud- ulent procurement concealed his Com- court. affiliation from naturalization munist Government fraud proceeds charge upon here not but upon charge illegal procurement. in which the proceeding not a naturalization
This is being privilege asked to confer Government is Instead the Government citizenship upon applicant. years citizen- back twelve after full turn the clock seeks to judicial decree, a upon petitioner ship was conferred priceless him of deprive benefits that derive consequences from In its it is that status. more serious or the taking property, imposition than a of one’s of a For it is penalty. fine or other safe assert that nowhere right today greater citizenship world worth than country. to an individual it is It would exaggerate difficult to its value and importance. By regarded highest many hope it is of civilized men. granted This does mean that once alien, to an citizen- ship cannot be revoked or grounds cancelled on legal right under But appropriate proof. such conferred once should not be away taken without clearest sort of justification proof. So, whatever may be the rule Manzi, (see States v. naturalization proceeding 276 U. in an 467), S. action instituted under § 15 for the purpose depriving one of the precious right of citizenship previously conferred we believe the facts and the law should be construed as far isas possible reasonably favor citizen. Especially is this so when the attack made long after the time when the certificate of
123 met meanwhile has citizen the citizenship granted and was of lawlessness. no act has obligations committed his the on proof Govern- the not denied that burden It to be stated presently For reasons ment this case. and convinc- of a clear met with evidence burden must be citizenship upon conferred was ing character that when it not done accordancе 1927 was petitioner legal requirements. strict here dealing
We are with a court decree entered after petitioner be At the time se- opportunity to heard. his from federal citizenship cured certificate of the district court for the Southern District of California notice of the filing required of the naturalization was to petition on given ninety days petition (§ before the was acted take was 1906), hearing petition the Act of the on the to open (§9), court United States had the place wit- petitioner to to his right appear, cross-examine and to evidence, oppose petition to introduce nesses, court ex- district (§ 11). acting upon In petition Article III of judicial power conferred ercised right ap- had Constitution, and Government naturalization. Tutun v. granting from the decision peal does States, before us U. record S. was under circumstances not reveal the We court. place open it took except naturalized its exercised the Government or not whether not know do not, it Whether did appeal. right appear re-examining judg- here that we are fact remains hard it. under solemnly conferred rights and the ment, in which the before us come first case to is the This of natural- aside a decree sought set has Government charge granted on was years after ization Accordingly erroneous. finding of attachment scope nature have had to consider time we the first proceed- in a denaturalization Government’s right judgment finding and of attachment to re-examine a ing *6 upon illegal Because of the procurement. a charge we take of not reach, view this case we do and therefore do consider, questions not two which have been raised concerning scope right. of that
The question whether, first aside grounds from such jurisdiction as lack of or kind of fraud which tradi tionally judgments, vitiates cf. United States v. Throck morton, 98 U. 61; Benson, Kibbe v. S. 624, Wall. Con gress constitutionally can attach to the exercise of the judicial power under Article III of Constitution, authority judgment to re-examine a granting a certificate citizenship judgment after that has become final by exhaustion of the appellate process by a failure to invoke it.3
The question second is whether under the Act of 1906 as it was 1927 the Government, the absence of a claim relying fraud and wholly upon a charge of illegal pro- curement, can secure a de novo re-examination of a naturalization finding court’s judgment that an appli- cant for citizenship was attached to Constitution.
We do not
questions.
consider these
For though we
assume,
deciding,
without
that
absence
fraud a
certificate of naturalization can be set aside under
15§
as “illegally procured”
finding
because the
as to attach-
ment would later seem to be erroneous, we are of the
Congress
Since 1790
has conferred the function
admitting
aliens
citizenship
exclusively upon the courts.
In exercising their author
ity under this mandate the federal
exercising
courts are
judicial
power
States,
of the United
upon
conferred
them
Article III of
the Constitution.
States,
Tutun v. United
Certain undisputed. facts are Petitioner came to this country from in Russia or when he was approx- imately In three. 1922, at the age of he sixteen, became a charter member of the Young (now Workers Commu- in League nist) Angeles Los and remained a member until 1929 or 1930. In at age of eighteen, he filed his declaration of intention to become a citizen. Later in year same early 1925 he became a member of the
H-i fcO as Party, predecessor Communist Workers membership States. That has continued the United filed present. petition to the His naturalization was on January 18, 1927, citizenship and his certificate of issued on June the United 10, 1927, States District Court for the Southern District of California. He had subjected been 1927,4 arrested or to censure prior and there nothing indicating the record that he was ever any connected with illegal overt or violent action or any disturbance of any sort. petitioner, called one
Eor its case the States Party, member of the Communist Humphreys, a former Angeles police formerly and one a Los officer Hynes, charge witnesses, of the radical squad, introduced in evidence number of documents. Petitioner testified behalf, evidence, on his own introduced some documentary and read into record transcripts testimony university given in professors two another proceeding. following: a boy As he lived testified Petitioner circumstances poverty-stricken Angeles in Los study League prin- what the Young joined the Workers say about the conditions of had to ciples of Communism membership his activities society. He considered *8 five-year during period the be- Party and the League twenty-one sixteen and before he was ages tween attempt investigate study as an and naturalized, behind social and economic and reasons conditions. causes working his way through night he was high Meanwhile college. From 1922 about and 1925he was “edu- school League. The director” of the cational duties of this non- organize salaried were to position classes, open to pub- study register for the of Marxist lic, theory, students out notices for and to send meetings; no did 4 nothing The rеcord contains to indicate that the same is not true period for after
127 corresponding he was During and 1926 teaching. clerical, this was a Angeles; in Party Los secretary of the organ- an In he became position. executive League. first execu- for the His spokesman izer official in when he Party with the came was position tive in then secretary California, first organizational made an he Connecticut and later Minnesota where Party governor Communist candidate for 1932. Since Party’s 1934 he has been a member of the National secretary Party Committee. At he is of the present California. during all the time he further that testified
Petitioner he has League Party and sub- belonged to has organizations. He those principles scribed of the correctness the essential he “believed stated that Party Communist of the by the theory applied as Marx “to philosophy subscribed and States,” that he writings in the as manifested of Socialism principles understanding interpretation his Lenin,” of the practice since program, principles essentially the “were and are same those joined he Party’s in the 1938 Constitution. denied He enunciated” charges complaint specifically of the denied that Party advocated the overthrow of the Govern- he or the violence, force and and that ment of the United States attached to the of the he was not Constitution. in the membership Party compatible He considered with obligations citizenship. of American He stated that in retention of personal property personal he believed ownership use advocated social pro- but means of exchange, compensation duction and the owners. hoped He believed socialization could be achieved processes history here democratic but showed that the ruling minority always against has used force the majority surrendering power. By before dictatorship pro- *9 letariat meant of the “majority people that the use the instru- own destinies and direct their really shall He truly ends.” for democratic state these ment against arms native would bear his Russia he stated that necessary. if he had been member testified that of the
Humphreys
and understood he
Party
expelled
be-
Communist
from petitioner.
refused to take orders
He had
cause he
government
forms of
present
would
taught
been
have
“through the dictatorship
prole-
to be abolished
would be established by
a “revolutionary
tariat”
He
the program
asserted
process.”
Party
property
of all
was the socialization
without compensa-
regard
advocacy
With
tion.
force and violence he
took
Party
Communist
the defensive,
said: “the
and put
upon
of force
the capitalistic
the first users
government;
government
they
capitalistic
claimed that
would re-
the establishment
the Soviet
through
sist
system,
force
violence,
working
and that the
justified
class would be
using
force and violence to establish the Soviet system
society.”
Hynes testified that he had been a member of the Party
eight
months in
He
stated that the Communist
bringing
change
method of
about a
govern-
the form of
one of force
ment is
violence;
he based this statement
“knowledge I
upon:
gained
have
as a member in 1922
knowledge
and from what further
I have gained from read-
ing
official
various
publications, published and circulated
by the
Communist
and from observation and ac-
tual
contact
the activities of the Communist
Party .
.” On
.
cross-examination Hynes admitted thаt
attempted
he never
philosophic
analysis
the litera-
read,
ture he
but
only read
to secure evidence, reading
underscoring
those portions which, in his opinion,
adequacy
For a discussion of the
testimony
somewhat similar
parte
by Hynes
see Ex
Fierstein,
The testimony and Marx, Engels by writings the theory as evidenced the use did not advocate and Lenin, concluded attaining its as method force and violence objective. peti- held that the court
In district opinion its written illegally procured was naturalization certificate of tioner’s belonged petitioner to which organizations the because the Constitution principles opposed were to the overthrow of advocated advised, taught and and peti- violence, and therefore force and Government organizations such membership his tioner, “by reason of was ‘attached activities, in their participation and States, of the Constitution happiness and disposed good well order and ” same.’ Supp. F. facts findings The also made purported district court prin the effect not attached to was disposed good well ciples of Constitution and same, and was a disbeliever happiness order fraudulently his organized government, that he concealed membership League and the from the natural court, allegiance ization and that his oath of was false. illegally conclusion was that certificate The of law was findings fraudulently procured. pertinent of fact on the most points, margin,6 these set forth are but decree certificate “The it is said 6 IV. Court finds that true that procured illegally of naturalization were and obtained in this: That respondent [petitioner] not, time his at the naturalization during Court, period years said five immediately preceding general of ultimate fact. It impossible conclusions tell from them upon underlying what facts the court re lied, proper statutory whether were ob standards served. If it were not unnecessary by rendered the broad view we take of this we to reverse case, would be inclined as, person not behaved filing petition for naturalization had of his *11 and of the United States principles the Constitution attached to the of happiness of the same. disposed good order and well to filing of the it is not true that at the time “The Court finds that respondent in was not a disbeliever petition of for naturalization his organized government opposed or a member of or affiliated or to organization body teaching opposed any persons or disbelief or of organized government. during all of times “The Court finds that truth and fact said respondent principles had behaved as a man to the of not attached good disposed of the Constitution the United States and well to the happiness same, order but of affiliated and was a member and supported principles organiza- with and believed and of certain (Com- Party America, tions known as the Workers Workers Party munist) America, the Communist of the United States Young America, League America, Young Workers Work- (Communist) League Young ers of America and the Communist League America, organizations were, was, and each of them at all mentioned, International, times herein a section of the Third principles organizations of all said opposed of which were principles of the Constitution States, advised, United and advo- cated, taught and Government, the overthrow of the Constitution and laws of taught the United States force and violence and disbelief opposition organized government. in and V. “The Court further during finds that respon- all of said times the dent has been and now organizations is a member of said and has in, continued support to believe advocate and the said organizations.” said (The VI. finding substance of is that fraudulently concealed his Communist affiliation from the naturalization court. It is not set forth because it is not an issue 7, infra.) here. See Note VII. “The court further finds that it is true that said decree and certificate of illegally naturalization were and fraudulently procured and obtained in this: respondent [petitioner] That before was ad- mitted citizenship as aforesaid, he declared on open oath in court mak purpose court district remand to the and findings. ing adequate ground affirmed on Appeals Court of
The Circuit holding that illegally procured, the certificate “clearly false was oath was finding petitioner's certiorari, and granted We E. 2d 500.7 erroneous.” reverse reargument, now argument and having heard after below. judgments I “to establish Congress authorizes The Constitution and we (Art. 4), cl. I, 8,§ rule of naturalization” uniform given to be is a privilege, that naturalization may assume Cf. Congress fit. sees on conditions or withheld such States, and that support United that he would the Constitution allegiance and abjured all absolutely entirely and he renounced sovereignty, state, fidelity any foreign prince, potentate, and laws support he defend the Constitution would faith domestic, bear true foreign against enemies, States all fact, the time at allegiance same, whereas in truth and *12 and to the [peti- open court, respondent in making such declarations on oath States, support the to the Constitution of United did not intend tioner] abjure all absolutely entirely to renounce and intend and and did not state, allegiance any foreign prince, potentate, or fidelity to and support the Constitu- sovereignty, did not to defend and intend and against enemies, foreign all and tion and laws of the United States allegiance same, domestic, true faith and to the but to bear and/or allegiance respondent to and at said time intended and did maintain Republics fidelity and to the said to the of Soviet Socialist Union de- support International, to and and Third and intended to adhere teachings principles and of said Third Inter- fend and advocate national, teachings opposed principles and were advised, and and of the Constitution of United States advocated taught Government, the overthrow of the Constitution laws and force violence.” United States and 7 unnecessary charge That court said it was to consider of fraudu procurement by petitioner’s concealment of lent Communist affiliation. pressed charge here, The Government has not and we do con not it. sider
132
Macintosh,
615, 605,
283 U. S.
United States v.
ibid,
Hughes,
p.
at
627.
dissenting
Justice
opinion of Chief
States,
Turner
also Tutun v. United
568, 578;
270 U.
S.
See
Williams,
firmly-
279. But because of our
v.
194 U. S.
not
belief,
certainly
of freedom of
we
will
rooted tradition
construing
in
the naturalization and denatural-
presume
Congress
liberty
to circumscribe
acts that
meant
ization
in
thought by general phrases
those statutes.
political
the Macintosh
in
in
Hughes
Chief Justice
said
dissent
As
in
general
such
not
case,
рhrases
construed,
“should be
opposition to,
with,
theory
practice
but
accord
of our Government
relation to freedom of conscience.”
Holmes,
283
at
J., dissenting
U. S.
635. See also
Schwimmer,
States
v.
When 1927, was naturalized applicable statutes did not proscribe communist beliefs or affiliation They as such.8 did forbid the naturalization of disbe- in organized government lievers or organiza- members of teaching tions such disbelief. Polygamists and advocates political assassination were also Applicants barred.9 required support for citizenship were to take an oath to Constitution, allegiance to bear true faith and same and the laws of the United States, renounce allegiance all any foreign prince, potentate, state appear sovereignty.10 And, it was to “be made to category enlarging 1940, while of beliefs Nationality Act of applying citizenship, disqualifying does persons thereafter grounds or affiliation for refusal make communist beliefs terms fill; 1137, U. S. C. naturalization. Stat. § § Immigration “communist” into Bills to write a definition (40 1012,41 1008) Deportation Act of 1918 as amended Stat. Stat. *13 deportation pass “communists” provide to for failed to Con- the gress again 12044, Rep. 1353, in 1935. See H. R. H. No. 1932 Cong. Rep. 808, 12097-108, Cong., S. No. Rec. 1st 75 72d Sess. See 1023, pts. 7120, Rep. 2, Cong., 1 and also H. R. H. No. 74th 1st Sess. 9 29, 1906, of Act 8 C. 7 of June U. S. 364. § § 10 1906, 4 of Act of 29, June 8 S. C. 381. U. § §
133 immedi- naturalization that of the court” of satisfaction applicant “has re- ately the preceding_the-application, years United five continuously sided within the States during at that time he has behaved least, . . . and that character, prin- the good as a man of moral attached to ciples States, and well of the of the United Constitution disposed the of the same.”11 good to order happiness requirement Whether satisfied this is the last issue crucial this case.
To apply the cor- statutory requirement of attachment rectly to the proof necessary to adduced, it is ascertain its meaning. On its face the criterion is not at- statutory period tachment to for a but behavior Constitution, years five as man a attached to its and well disposed good order and of the happiness States. Since the normal is con- connotation of behavior duct, there is something proposition to be said for the the 1906 Act objective created lim- purely qualification, iting inquiry to If applicant’s an previous conduct.12 this 11 1906, S. C. 29, 8 TJ. § Act of June of4§ 12 gives support to some history phrase legislative The appeared Naturalization requirement first behavior view. tighten designed the Act 414, which was 1795, Act of Stat. little cast 1795 Act debates on the discursive 103. The 1 Stat. purpose “behaved,” but indicate that meaning of light upon the during probationary period provide requirement of the plan. members Some of our Constitutional could learn which aliens spoke age accord political ferment were disturbed asylum regarded ingly, the United States while others probe for beliefs. It minds oppressed and mistrusted efforts adopted protest oath, significant which was over perhaps require applicant bill, did Madison, sponsor Constitution, only but that he he was attached! to swear Congress, pp. 1004-09, 1021-23, support it. Annals of would See Franklin, Legislative 1030-58, 1062, 1064r-66. See also His 1026-27, (1906), Chapter in the IV. tory United States of Naturalization (2 153) requirement was reenacted Stat. at The behavior repeal stringent for the Jefferson Act the recommendation of *14 134
objective satisfied requirement, standard in abiding all re- has been law statute. His conduct spects. he never bеen According to the record has ar- rested, any disorder, single or not a connected with and written spoken during or of the relevant his, statement period from 1922 to thereafter, advocating or violent 1927 Government, overthrow the statement, indeed even a apart from his in testimony proceeding, this that he de- sired any change in the Constitution produced. has been The possible sole petitioner’s criticism is membership and activity in the League and Party, but those member- ships qua- memberships were immaterial under the 1906 Act. op. cit., Franklin, Chapter VI. It continued 1798,1 566. See Stat. imported time unchanged which for the first Act of 1906 until the provided when it laws present the naturalization test of belief into government polygamists organized in disbelievers 7 that § continuation of behavior test for citizens. The could not become searching examination was a less
attachment some indication that (other than an- field—that conduct not belief intended in this Nationality criterion. The Act of polygamist) archist or was the requirement provision person changed to a that no 1940 the behavior person good unless he “has been and still is could be naturalized a character, moral attached to the Constitution States, disposed good happiness United and well order and 1142, States,” Report United Stat. 8 U. S. C. The 54 707. § Nationality (1939) the President’s Committee to Revise the Laws change language regarded change indicates substance, as a Congressional p. reports 23. The committee are silent question. sponsors on House, The however, Act in the generally tighten an declared intent restrict the naturalization Cong. 11942, laws. See 11947, 86 Rec. chairman charge of the sub-committee who had the bill stated “sub- changes necessary stantive rights, connection with certain persons preventing a view have who no real attachment enjoying high United from privilege States of American nation- ality.” Cong. change Rec. suggests 11948. This remark from “behaved as a man attached” to person “has been still is change meaning. attached” was a Schwimmer, 644, U. S. v. In United States however,, was Macintosh, 283 U. S. 605; States v. ap belief —that created test held the statute *15 man behave a only not must Act under the 1906 plicant must Constitution, but principles attached We naturalization. the time in fact at :of be so attached it*is for even'if this construction reexamine stop not do before, mentioned changed.. not As accepted, the result is in Hughes of Chief Justice agree with the statement we requirement behavior case that the dissent Macintosh’s in construed, op not should be which general “a in. phrase of practice theory with, in accord position to., but of conscience.” to freedom in relation our Government dissenting opinion Jus also the at See 283 U. S. of. As case, supra, 653-55. Schwimmer in Holmes tice proceeding, before, this is a denaturalization pointed out grant, which or merely not a claim judgment, is a Assuming have that the United being as we attacked. finding upon of attachment to attack a States is entitled sustain, the burden charge illegality, heavy of it must .prove it to lack .of upon which then attachment rests evidence, does convincing” “clear, unequivocal, and in doubt. not leave the When attachment issue re above, as indicated we do not quirement is construed has its burden of proof. think the Government carried claim not in was fact-attached to .The disposed good and well the Constitution order happiness the United States at the-time his natural- рrevious year period ization and five is twofold: that, First, believed in such sweeping changes he simply Constitution he it; could not be attached Second, he believed and advocated overthrow by force the Government, and violence Constitution ' n and laws the United States. In support position that petitioner its in fact principles attached to the of the Constitution because Party, the Govern- and the membership League his tes- petitioner’s first to ment our has directed attention of those or- timony principles that he subscribed to alleged principles then to certain ganizations, and Leaders which are to be by Party and statements said fundamentally variance with the principles at Con- point stitution. At this it is to mention appropriate what fully developed will be more later —that our under tra- personal and ditions beliefs are not a matter mere asso- political ciation, adhering party and that men to a organization unquali- notoriously other do not subscribe to all its fiedly platforms or asserted principles. Said among to be Communist those 1927 are: private abolition of property without compensation; proletarian erection of newa state upon the ruins *16 bourgeois old state; the creation of dictatorship of a the of proletariat; political rights denial mem- to others than bers the or of the Party proletariat; and the creation of ' republics. a world union of soviet Amer- Statements that “is democracy ican a fraud”13 and the that purposes “utterly antagonistic the to the purposes for democracy, called, American so formed,”14 was are stressed.
Those principles and views are not generally accepted— in they fact are distasteful to most of us—and they call for change considerable in present our form of government society. and But we not think do the Government has carried its of proving by burden evidence which does not in leave issue doubt that in not fact attached to of the Constitution well disposed to good order and happiness of the United when States he was naturalized 1927. 13Program and Constitution (1921-24). Workers Party
14Acceptance speech of William Z. Foster, the Party’s nominee for Presidency in 1928. revolution, did fathers, fresh from a constitutional strait-jacket generations for the forge political First Article V and wrote they Instead come.15 fol thought, soon freedom Amendment, guaranteeing con for procedural provisions contains lowed. Article V any present change without by amendment stitutional de may no except that State limitation whatsoever its without in the representation Senate prived equal Cases, S. 253 U. National Prohibition consent. Cf. far-reaching many important and the provision This 1787 refute since changes made the Constitution pro or any provision particular idea attachment radical who essential, visions is one advocates Constitution. changes is not attached necessarily at constitutions Writing men look said: Jefferson “Some cov the ark of the reverence, with them like sanctimonious and deem pre men enant, They too sacred to be touched. ascribe to they did age suppose what ceding human, and a wisdom more than it, belonged to beyond age well; I to be amendment. I knew that very country. It was It its and labored with it. deserved well forty experience present; present, like the but without the bookreading; century years experience govеrnment is worth dead. they say themselves, they from the and this were to rise would changes frequent I untried certainly am not an advocate imperfections had better laws and I think moderate constitutions. known, our with; because, be borne when once we accommodate correcting their ill effects. them, practical find means of selves go also, know that laws and institutions hand in hand But I must developed, progress human mind. As becomes more *17 disclosed, enlightened, made, new truths more as new discoveries are opinions change circumstances, change and manners and with of pace also, keep with the We institutions must advance and times. might require him a man to wear still the which fitted as well coat boy, society regimen when a as civilized to remain ever under of Ford, Writings, p. X, their barbarous ancestors.” Jefferson’s vol. Compare Inaugural that, his First Address: “And let us reflect religious having from our banished land that intolerance under which long yet gained bled we if we suffered, mankind so and have little As Rovin, 2d 944-45.16 Justice 12 F. United States v. lack of attachment it show said,1'“Surely cannot Holmes . . . that the Constitution [one] Schwimmer, United States v. be improved.” thinks it can de sincerity of and the supra (dissent). of, Criticism by judged not be improve, the Constitution should sires any “if there conformity thought because, prevailing calls imperatively that principle the Constitution more free it any principle than other attachment thought agree us, thought for those who free —not Id. See hate.” also thought but freedom for the that we political wicked, capable countenance a despotic, as intolerance as bloody During of as persecutions. bitter and convul- throes sions of world, during agonizing spasms the ancient infuriated man, seeking through slaughter long-lost liberty, was blood and his agitation not wonderful that this of the billows should reach even peaceful distant shore; this be that more felt and feared should by by others, opinions some and less and should as to divide measures safety. every But opinion difference of is not a difference of brethren, principle. We have called different names of the same principle. Republicans, We are all we all Federalists. there If any among us change who would wish to dissolve this Union toor republican form, its let them stand undisturbed as monuments safety opinion may with which error be tolerated where reason is I to combad it. know, indeed, that some honest men fear left free republican government strong, cannot be this Govern- strong enough.;., ment is not but patriot, honest in the full would.the tide of experiment, successful government abandon a which has far so kept and, us free firm on the visionary theoretic fear Government, hope, world’s best may by possibility energy want preserve itself? I trust not.” Richardson, Messages Papers Presidents, I, p. (emphasis vol. added). 16See also 18 Cornell Quarterly Law 251; Freund, United States v. Macintosh, A Symposium, 26 Illinois Law Review 375, 385; Har vard Law Review 325. As a matter of very fact one change material in the Constitution as it stood 1927 when was naturalized has since been repeal effected Eighteenth Amendment.
139 Mac States v. dissenting United in Hughes Chief Justice indi may we attitude Whatever intosh, supra, p. be that organizations persons hold toward vidually existing order, changes in our extensive in or lieve advocate uphold to concern at all times be our desire it should thinking we free to which discussion and of free right To this neglect attachment. primary claim people as a judge upon to in we are in proceeding duty .called manifest fаiled to individual has particular whether ironical would be the Constitution attachment to indeed. Congress be the meant with what
Our concern is thought under the statute. allowable extent of area evident of the terms it is generality employed By very one which should test, elastic Congress intended an that attempts precise at definition. by be circumscribed not not it is thought, freedom of In of our tradition of view Congress 1906, pred- or its the Act of be presumed offer naturaliza- intended to- 1802,17 ecessors 1795 those tion whose views coincide with only political those majority 1787 or best the founders considered today. Especially is this so since country general test of language used, posing "attachment” repressive susceptible of so a construction.18 necessarily agrees “may that an alien think Government be laws and Constitution should amended some respects” and still attached to the many meaning within the the Constitution the statute. 12, Note ante. See denying Congress pass a bill naturalization to In 1938 failed to any government any form of United person “who believes for the contrary existing'in States, now or who is States United any organization any a member of or which advocates affiliated government contrary form 'for States to that now the United existing Cong., in the States.” H. R. 75th 3d Sess. *19 per- those discussing the nature and extent of
Without an missible the Government insists that alien changes, sincerely “general poli- adhere to the must believe philosophy” tical of the Constitution.19 Petitioner is said opposed “political to be minimum philosophy,” the requirements margin.20 It of which are set forth the argued the no at bar since Article V contains limitations, person a can be to the Constitution attached changes no matter how extensive he desires, the are that long so he as seeks achieve his ends within the frame- work of Article V. But not validity we need consider the of this extreme position for if the construc- Government’s tion accepted, it has not its carried burden even proof under its own test.
The district
court did not
findings
state
its
what
principles held by petitioner
byor
the
Party
Communist
opposed
were
to the Constitution and
lack of
indicated
attachment.
See
6,
Note
In
opinion
ante.
its
that court
merely
upon
relied
In re Saralieff,
F.
436,
59
2d
and United
States v. Tapolcsanyi,
as views “these stated presses here Government 2d at 503-04. F. Constitution.” of our those he desired changes to the Constitutional regard With nationalization he believed testified compen- exchange production means of “demo- of our utilization preservation sation, and advantage for the possible as far ... cratic structure “dictatorship that the He stated working classes.” but government, “not him meant of the proletariat” *20 the people majority “the in which things” a state of the instru- use and own destinies their really shall direct None ends.” truly democratic for these ment of the state politi- “general incompatible necessarily of this by as outlined above of the Constitution philosophy” cal Amendment the Fifth true that It is the Government. for taking public against even protects private property, history throughout our But compensation. without use general con- to the attachment people sincere whose many have, various cannot be doubted stitutional scheme differing degrees gov- urged divergent reasons, and even resources, natural control of ownership ernmental media of banks and the production, basic means And exchange, compensation. either with or without something regarded species private property a once when compensating without the owners was abolished slavery institution of forbidden.21 Can it be said that was of the Emancipation sup- the author Proclamation and the porters of the Thirteenth Amendment were not attached to the Constitution? We conclude that of attach- lack ment not Constitution is shown on the basis of generally Thorpe, History See Constitutional of the United States (1901), Ill, vol. book V.
Compare Eighteenth effect Amendment. in the he-desired changes which petitioner-testified
Constitution. what
Turning now seriatim consideration to a of the Communist principles asserts are Government opposed and which are which believed Party, petitioner ; our Constitution, our remains the same— conclusion unequivocal proved “clear, the Government has not convincing” evidence that the naturalization court could have been satisfied was attached to' the he Constitution when naturalized. principle of nationali-
We already disposed have exchange with or zation of agents of-production prole- without of a new compensation. erection bourgeois tariat upon state, state of the old the ruins proletariat may creation of be dictatorship together. considered The concept dictatorship the proletariat loosely used, upon is one which words more light than argument have been shed. Much has been directed as to how is to achieved, it be but we have been precise offered no general definition here. In the sense the may term taken to describe a state the workers or masses, rather than the bourgeoisie capitalists the dominant class. Theoretically class, is control *21 not a in dictatorship the sense of absolute and total rule by one individual. So far as record the before us indi- the cates, concept a fluid one, capable adjustment of different in conditions different countries. There are only meager indications of the form the “dictatorship” would take in country. this- It does not appear that would mean necessarily the representative end of govern- ment or the system. federal Program The and Constitu- tion of the Party Workers (1921-24) criticized the con- stitutional system of checks and balances, the Senate’s power to pass on legislation, the procedure involved
143 them as characterizing Constitution, amending for majority.22 of will frustrate designed devices the Communist platform The 1928 hence naturalization petitioner’s after States, аdopted Senate,7 relevant, advocated strictly not abolition Presi- power of the veto Court, and Supreme with districts congressional dent, and replacement executive legislative in which of workers” “councils signifi- indeed These would be united. would power structure— governmental present in our changes cant not desired say are safe to changes which it is our whatever country in this people majority of —but that a who say person we cannot judges as personal views, through and constitu- peaceful adoption their advocates the Constitution— attached to fact tional means is necessary not enumerated institutions are those philosophy,” “general political test Government’s be main- liberty” could “ordered conceivable that it is free gone has not The them. Senate tained without Amendment object of the Seventeenth and one criticism The public will.23 responsive to to make it more was country.24 in the is not unknown legislature unicameral large part has played this Court It is true that much (sometimes too plan constitutional unfolding of the observers), but we would be opinion so some government that a presumed if we arrogant indeed im- minority groups, would be laws, protection agencies government, Like other without it. possible escaped times its existence has not at various this Court merely adopted, this was never but Petitioner testified that study. a draft for (1938), Haynes, pp. of the United States Senate See 96-98. 106-115, 1068-74. experiment body. Compare with such a Nebraska Nebraska’s Constitution, III, Bulletin 341. Article 13 Nebraska Law See §
tí» i-* sincerity and attachment whose shafts of critics question who have accused beyond Constitution is —critics judicial not intended assuming it of functions review abusing it, to be conferred those functions to upon have will, thwart the and who advocated various popular taking range.24a hardly remedies a wide And it is con consequence freeing legislative ceivable that branch from the restraint of the executive veto would be government.24b the end of By constitutional this discus sion we do certainly not mean to indicate that we would favor changes. such preference Our have aversions bearing no here. Our concern is with the extent of the allowable thought area of under the statute. We decide only that possible it is to advocate such changes and still attached the Constitution within the meaning Government’s minimum test.
If any provisions singled Constitution can be out requiring unqualified they attachment, are the guaranties Rights Bill of and especially that of thought freedom of contained the First Amendment. Cf. Justice Holmes’ dissent United States v. Schwim mer, supra. We do reach, however, question whether was attached to the principles of the Constitution if he believed in denying political and civil rights persons not members of the Party or of the so- called proletariat, for on the basis record before us it has not been clearly shown that such denial was a principle the organizations to which petitioner belonged. judicial g., 24a E. the recall of Roosevelt, decisions. See Theodore Democracy, 348, A Charter Cong., S. Doc. No. 62d 2d Sess. For proposed relating judiciary constitutional amendments and this 353, 2, pt. Cong., Court H. Doc. Sess., pp. 144-64; see No. 54th 2d S. Cong., 93, Sess., Doc. pp. 83,86, 111, No. 69th 1st 93,101, 123, 133. 24b account For an of the attacks power on veto see H. Doc. No. Cong., 353, pt. Sess., 54th 2d pp. 129-34.
145 those or of principle this was that it is doubtful Since whether speculative much more certainly it is ganizations, the Some of part petitioner’s philosophy. of this was enemies” of indicate that “class in the record documents rights.25 of their deprived political be should proletariat the necessary real not to however, wrote that Lenin, Party’s 1928 The dictatorship proletariat.26 ize of the the to right organize, platform unrestricted demanded the right free the unrestricted of picket strike and to working assemblage the speech, free and free for press Interna Program of the Communist class. 1928 grant religious the will states that proletarian tional State on freedom, carry time it will anti- while at the same religious propaganda. is attached
We should not hold not in the by the Constitution reason of his belief possible creation of some form of republics of world union soviet who willing regard we to those unless to hold with so in Pan-Americanism, League believe Union Nations, of Now, or some other form of international collaboration Statutes, 25 Revolution; Lenin, State Communism; of ABC International; to the Communist of Admission Conditions Theses and Com Program Leninism; Practice Theory Stalin, munist International. exploit question depriving observed “It should be question question, not a purely Russian franchise ers general. It be a ... would dictatorship proletariat pro impending guarantee in advance that however, mistake, part, neces all, for the most be Europe will letarian revolutions for the bour accompanied restriction of the franchise sarily experience war our of the geoisie. they After Perhaps will. so; it say probably will but can the Russian revolution we realizing the necessary purpose dictator absolutely for ‘dictatorship,’ logical symptom concept of the ship, it is not an essential class condition historical and an essential it does not enter as ” (Placed ‘dictatorship.’ Works, VII, pp. concept Selected vol. 142-3. petitioner.) evidence grow present may out security which or collective an invidious one would be A here holocaust. distinction tolerate the might agree with or the fact that we based on disagree with the former. but dislike or latter intended, If allowed, Congress think room is as we principles, foregoing play ideas, free none clarity might be held stand forth with sufficient *24 imputed his petitioner to to on the basis of member- ship League Party and activity and the and his that testimony he to of principles subscribed those organizations, enough, is our opinion as to their whatever merits, prove to that he necessarily was not to attached the Constitution when he was naturalized. The cumu- lative effect greater. is no
Apart alleged principles from question whether assertedly believed Party petitioner were so which fundamentally that he opposed Constitution was 1927, attached to its the Government con- petitioner tends that not attached because he believed was in the peaceful use of force and violence instead of demo- cratic methods In to achieve his desires. support of this phase argument its Government asserts that organizations petitioner actively with which affiliated was advised, taught advocated and the overthrow of the Gov- ernment, Constitution and laws of the United States force and violence, and that petitioner therefore believed in that method of governmental change.
Apart from his membership in the League and the Party, the record is barren any conduct statement on petitioner’s part which slightеst indicates that he believed and advocated the employment of force and violence, instead peaceful persuasion, as a means attaining political believed, ends. To find that he so advocated it necessary, therefore, to find that such was principle organizations to which belonged he then impute that principle to him on the basis of his he statement his organizations in those activity frankly The Government principles. their to subscribed it is unsound . . that . true normally “it is concedes in the expressed views organization to impute to writings such impute members, or writings all its contends, Government But . . .”27 each member certain petitioner impute proper it however, that upon in evidence from the documents excerpts advocacy of force relies to show particularly the Communist principle was a violence offi- those documents were because United States because by the carefully supervised Party, publications cial members, and over its discipline Party’s notorious and file or acci- mere “rank not a because intelligent and “an Party,” but dental member of the these or- leader of who “became a educated individual” revolutionary.” an intellectual Since ganizations as certainty determination with is the problem immediate 1927, events and writ- from 1922 to petitioner’s beliefs *25 relevance, and both parties time have little ings since that themselves within the limits of attempted have confine period. critical that question advocacy gov- time the whether
For some principle overthrow force and violence is ernmental Party of the per- the Communist United States has administrators, legislators, plexed courts, and students. proceedings varying deportation On records some courts findings have held that administrative that the did Party wanting so were not so evidential support advocate to amount to a denial of due held process,29others have
27Brief, pp. 23-24. 28Brief, pp. 25-26.
29 Supp. 525; 11 F. Skeffington v. 277 Saderquist, Katzeff, In re 129; 683; F. v. 11 F. 2d Curran, Kenmotsu v. Nagle, United States 953; 398; 44 F. 2d v. F. 88 Nagle, Cahill, 59 2d Branch v. Sormunen 545; 582; Kjar Doak, 566; F. 2d F. 2d 2d parte Vilarino, 50 v. 61 F. Ex T-l oo records,30 on different seem to some contrary they judicially will notice position
have taken the that is This Court Party principle.31 and violence force passed question Party whether the upon has never does advocate, unnecessary for us to do so now. so it candor admits
With commendable
the Government
presence
conflicting views on the issue of force
sharply
and violence
principle,32
as a
also concedes
that “some communist
respect
literature
of force and
violence
of an
susceptible
interpretation more rhetorical
33
than literal.”
insists, however,
excerpts
It
from
the documents
particularly relies,
enough
on which it
finding
show
the trial court’s
that the Communist
Party advocated violent overthrow of the Government
“clearly
not
erroneous,” and hence
not
can
be set
aside.34
previously
out,
As
pointed
the trial court’s find-
ings
do
indicate the bases for its
but
conclusions,
published
documents
prior to 1927 stressed by the Govern-
ment,
pertinent
excerpts
margin,
noted
v. Tillinghast,
621;
58 F. 2d
Berkman
2
Smith,
States v.
F. 2d
United
90;
United States v.
Wallis,
versed sub nom. Skeffington v. 277 F. Katzeff, Evatt, 129. And see J., King v. Hush (Ex parte 48 C. L. R. Devanny), 516-18. 34 (a) Rule 52 Procedure, of the A., Rules of Civil 28 C. U. follow S. 8 (c). ing 723
149 Engels;35 of Marx and Manifesto The Communist are: Statutes, The Lenin;36 by Revolution The State in evidence edition The proclaimed The Manifesto was Petitioner in 1932. Publishers published by International he publication, authorized it to testified that he believed he classes, and that work, used that was was familiar with the applied to the “particularly they thought correct its were they country about period written and the they in which were were written.” their disdain to conceal excerpts “The Communists
The stressed are: attained can be They openly that their ends declare views and aims. existing social conditions.” only by of all the forcible overthrow struggle “Though form, prole- substance, yet in not in struggle. pro- bourgeoisie The national tariat with the at first a country must, course, first settle matters letariat of each of all bourgeoisie. with its own general depicting phases development
“In most raging proletariat, war, we traced or less veiled civil within the more existing society, up point open that war breaks out where into revolution, bourgeoisie lays and where the violent overthrow of the sway proletariat.” the foundation for the February This work was written in between and October copy published Revolutions in Russia. The in evidence was in 1924 Daily by Publishing Company. Worker Petitioner testified that by probably it was circulated and that it was used in the classes of which he was “educational director.” excerpts are:
“Fifth, Engels, in the same work disquisition . . . there is also a revolution; on nature a appreciation of violent and the historical becomes, Engels, its role panegyric a veritable of a revolution This, course, force. no one remembers. To talk or even to importance think of idea, of this respectable considered our parties, modern daily Socialist and in the propaganda agitation among plays part the masses it no whatever. Yet indissolubly it is up 'withering bound with the away’ of the state in one harmonious Engels’ argument: whole. Here is “ plays force part 'That also another than history (other perpetuation evil), namely revolutionary part; that as Marx *27 Communist of Admission to the Theses and Conditions International;37 and of Lenin- Theory and Practice says, every society pregnant is the with a it old when it is midwife by one; new that force is the instrument and the means social way through up movements hack break dead and fossil- their . political by Duehring. Duly, ized forms—of all this not a word Herr sighs groans, possibility does he for the over- admit exploitation system may, perhaps, necessary, throw the force you please, force, forsooth, but most unfortunate because all if use of great demoralizes its And this user! is said face of the moral every and intellectual advance which has been the result of victorious turbid, flabby, . impotent, parson’s revolution! . . And this modé of thinldng acceptance dares offer revolutionary itself for to the most party history has ever known.’ ” necessity systematically, fostering
“The among the masses this point only of view about violent lies revolution at the root Engels’ teaching, just neglect whole of Marx’s and it agitation propaganda by present predominant such both brings Social-Chauvinists and the Kautskian schools that their be- trayal prominent into of it relief.” “
(Quoting Engels) ‘Revolution part popu- is an act which of the by lation forces its will parts on other riflеs, means bayonets, e., by cannon, i. most authoritative conquering means. And party inevitably forced supremacy to maintain its by means of that fear ” inspire which its arms in the reactionaries.’ 37Petitioner contends that this document was never introduced in evidence, only and the shows record that was marked for identifi cation. The view we of the take case makes it immaterial whether this document is in evidence not. The copy furnished us was printed auspices in 1923 under Party. Hynes Workers it was publication, testified that an official widely but not circulated. had particular Petitioner no recollection of the pamphlet and testified that the party American was not bound it. excerpts Thé are: victory “That which before the proletariat seems but a opinion theoretical question difference of on the ‘democracy,’ be- forth sets also The Government Stalin.38 written ism, little entitled which are excerpts documents other from *28 can question victory, a the morrow of inevitably on the comes by of arms.” force only decided bourgeoisie the victory the over working cannot achieve “The class arms by policy folded alone, the and general by of the strike means uprising.” armed resort to an proletariat
The must against struggle proletariat of the elementary means of the “The mass demon- is, all, the method of bourgeoisie first the rule and carried out prepared are mass demonstrations Such strations. aof the direction organized proletariat, under by masses the the Party. war is war. Civil centralized Communist united, disciplined, officers,its political its proletariat have efficient this war must In the stages the operations during all staff, good political general- conduct fight. of that system developing demon- struggle means a whole
“The mass leading form, logically to an growing ever more strations acute and government. against In capitalist the this war- uprising the order of war, party developing guiding fare into a civil of masses general every posi- must, rule, all lawful proletariat as a secure and work, revolutionary tions, making in the and sub- them its auxiliaries ordinating campaign, positions plans general that such struggle.” the mass Daily copy printed The in evidence was Worker Publish ing Company was familiar with either 1924 or Petitioner work, particular edition, not the it was but and testified probably Party. probably it, circulated He had read but Hynes after his Humphreys naturalization. testified it was used in communist classes. excerpts are: regard “Marx’s limitation with has ‘continent’ furnished opportunists every country pretext mensheviks of
asserting that Marx admitted possibility peaceful of a transforma- bourgeois tion democracy [in] proletarian into democracy, at least (England some America). countries recognize in fact Marx did possibility England of this in the and America of where the critical they published were after weight because period.39 Imperialism mili-
monopolist capitalism where did not exist and bureaucracy yet developed. tarism and were as little But now radically different; Imperialism is has situation these countries apogee bureaucracy there, reached its and there militarism and sovereign. longer consequence, applies.” In Marx’s restriction no Reformist, everything, revolutionary
“With the reform whilst only appears why work it as a form. This is with the reformist tactic bourgeois government, under a inevitably all reform tends con- powers be, solidate the and to weaken the revolution. the revоlutionary, contrary, thing “With on the the main is the revolutionary him, work and only not the reform. For reform accessory of revolution.” 39(a) Program of International, adopted the Communist in 1928 published by Library Publishers, Inc., Workers in 1929: “Hence, only necessary revolution is not because there is no other *29 way overthrowing ruling of class, only the because, but in the also process of overthrowing revolution is purge the class able to itself of the society dross of the old capable creating and become newa society.” general “agreed theoretical in”
Petitioner conclusionsstated regarded application Program, theory” “the that but he as “something else.”
(b) Programme Young International, published of the Communist oppressed in 1929: “An class which not possess does endeavor to and learn to handle arms would deserve to be as treated slaves. We bourgeois would become pacifists opportunists forget if we that living society, only we are in way through a class and that the out is struggle class power and the overthrow ruling class. Our slogan 'Arming proletariat, must be: conquer, expropriate bourgeoisie.’ Only disarm the proletariat after the has disarmed the bourgeoisie able, will betraying it be without task, its historic to throw all arms scrap heap. on the proletariat This the undoubtedly will only then, do. But on no account sooner.” (c) Why by Communism, Olgin, written published first by Library the Workers Publishers: say “We Communists way that there is one capitalist abolish the State, and is to smash it force. To possible make Communism in- 35 to 38 *30 necessity the last two excerpts The from documents stress Party participation elections, in but declare that fosters way power, workers can their no illusions vote the ex pulsion (see Assembly the New of Socialist members of York Chafee, Speech pp. 269-82) being in (1941), Free the United States point. example open statements cited as an These are inter to an pretation prediction, advocacy of not force and Note violence. Cf. 48,infra. lacking so evi- to that effect are findings
ministrative process. of due dentiary to a denial support as to amount proceed- this is denaturalization pointed As out before, if entitled to attack the Government ing which, the burden assumed, we have finding as of attachment by alleged of attachment upon prove it to lack rests That bur- convincing” “clear, unequivocal and evidence. not den not been has has carried. Government petitioner’s subject on of force and proved that beliefs violence such that he not were attached Consti- tution 1927.
In place phase the first case is Government’s subject proof to the admitted infirmities by imputa- tion.41 The difficulties of this are proof method here increased the fact that is, unfortunately, there no ab- solutely accurate test of a political princi- what party’s ples writings are.42 Political over-exaggerated often polemics bearing imprint period the place in which written.43 Philosophies cannot generally be studied vacuo. Meaning may be wholly distorted lifting sentences out context, of construing instead them part organic as of an Every whole. utterance of party leaders is taken party gospel. as And deny we would experience our ifmen we recognize did not that official party programs are unfortunately often opportunistic de- (then As Hughes Chief Mr.) Justice in opposing said the ex pulsion of the Socialist members the New Assembly: York “. . . it is оf the essence of the institutions liberty recog that it be guilt nized that personal and cannot be holding attributed to the opinion or mere intent in the acts; absence of overt . . .” Me morial of Special Appointed Committee by the Association of the Bar the City York, of New Legislative New York Documents, vol. (1920), 5.143d Session 30, p. No.
42 SeeChafee, Speech Free in the (1941), pp. United States 219-24. 43See ante. Note
155 as in the observance.44 breach in the much honored vices as that the say record we cannot present basis theOn its respect in this different so Party is Communist especially clarity, perfect forth with stand advocacy of issue the crucial with relation this so is admits the Government upon violence, force of this conflicting. presence The sharply is the evidence chain in the Government’s weakness the second conflict is adding by assiduously not eliminated It proof. in evidence to those from the documents excerpts further culled out the Government. in the before us conflict record can reality prior the relevant to 1927 Of quickly. out pointed
be three are by the Government upon relied documents outstanding leaders, writings philosophers, Marxist The Manifesto of 1848 program.45 is a world the fourth Europe engaged sup in an autocratic proclaimed was year. of that the abortive liberal revolutions pressing Its surprising.46 its tone background, this With stated, however, there were certain later authors England in countries, “such as the States and may by peace ends hope which the workers secure their 47 work, Lenin in his militant ful means.” doubted this written on the Revolution, The State and but may eve of the Bolshevist revolution Russia and interpreted part justify as intended in the Bolshevist
44 334; Bryce, (1915) II, p. See the American vol. Commonwealth Encyclopedia Sciences, p. III the Social ante. inclusive, See Notes 35 to 38 principles, particularly testified that he its Petitioner believed they applied country in period which written. See Note 35, ante. 47Marx, Speech Engels’ preface 1872; Amsterdam see also English (1886). Capital First Translation of *32 democrats.48 refute anarchists social
course and the for the exemption United declared that Marx’s Stalin longer He England wrote, no valid.49 States and the prestige that “the the however, proposition absurd and Party upon be built violence ... is ab can And Lenin solutely incompatible with Leninism.”50 power “In order the of the state the wrote to obtain class majority the to their conscious workers must win side. against long no violence used the there masses, As as is power. is no other road to We not we Blanquists, are in favor power by minority.”51 are of the seizure of a not the Party The Constitution Communist 1938 of the States, which to be claimed the first written only officially adopted constitution ever by Party the and which the he asserted enunciated Party of the as he them understood from the beginning England interpreted simply 48 Lenin’sremarks have been on as predicting, advocating, not the use of violence there. See the intro Coming Strachey, Struggle (1935). duction to for Power See ante. Note Leninism, Stalin, by I, pp. petitioner. vol. 282-83. Put in evidence 51Lenin, Works, by petitioner. Selected vol. Put VI. evidence In following: the same is work the extremely is an profound many “Marxism sided doctrine. It
is, therefore, not surprising scraps quotations from Marx— especially quotations when point always the are not to the be —can among 'arguments’ breaking found the of those who are with Marxism. military conspiracy Blanquism A by organized not party if class; of a organizers dеfinite its have not political reckoned if general situation in and the particular; international situation if party question enjoy sympathy does majority proved of the people, by facts; as development definite of events if in the revolution has not led dissipation virtual of the illusions of compromise petty entertained bourgeoisie; the-majority if organs revolutionary struggle recognized which to ‘authoritative’ or have themselves, otherwise established such as the Soviets, over; have not been (in won army in the war) time of if government sentiments hostile to drags a unjust out an war to force resort eschews ostensibly membership, his tactics.52 Party an element as violence foregoing is that from A tenable conclusion peaceful purpose its achieve in 1927 desired Party justified matter theoretical as a means, and democratic of prevent- method a only as violence use of force and once counter-overthrow forcible attempted ing or manner, peaceful had obtained control if at majority will enforce the resort to method of last circum- peculiar future time because indefinite some longer channels were no peaceful constitutional stances *33 open. agitation and difference between a material
There is for violent action which creates calling present exhortation danger public other present disorder or clear and justification or pre- mere doctrinal evil, and substantive hypothetical of force the use under conditions diction of prediction indefinite future not at some time — presently or intended to be acted upon, thus calculated fully matured; people the have not become against will of if (such power ‘All slogans Soviets,’ insurrection as ‘Land proposal peace peasants,’ ‘Immediate a democratic all abrogation belligerent peoples, coupled with the immediate of all etc.) diplomacy,’ acquired secret secret treaties and have widest popularity; the advanced workers are renown and not convinced if desperate of the masses support situation and of the by energetic countryside, peasant movement, as demonstrated or against against government the landlords a revolt that de- landlords; country fends the the economic situation in the offers if any hope real by peaceful of a favorable solution of the crisis parliamentary means.” 52 Party X, strike-breakers, Article members found to be §5. de generates, drunkards, betrayers Party confidence, provo habitual cateurs, advocates of terrorism and violence Party a method procedure, Party members whose actions are detrimental to the working class, summarily and the be shall dismissed positions from responsibility, expelled Party exposed from the general before the public. general and the calm
leaving opportunity discussion thought Bridges Cf. v. Cali processes of and reason. fornia, 252, concurring S. and Justice Brandeis’ 314 U. opinion Whitney California, v. 274 U. S. 372-80. Taylor Mississippi, See also U. v. S. 583. Because may Congress this difference we assume that intended, general Act, deny test of “attachment” in the 1906 naturalization persons falling category into the first but not to those in the second. Such a construction of preserves statute is to favored because it for novitiates as well as citizens the full benefit of that freedom of thought which political is a fundamental feature of our conflicting institutiоns. Under the evidence this case we say cannot that the Government proved by has such a preponderance of the evidence that the issue is not doubt, that attitude of Communist United States towards force and violence was not susceptible of classification in the category. second Peti tioner testified that he subscribed to interpretation of Party principles when he was naturalized, nothing in his conduct inconsistent with that téstimony. We conclude that the Government has not carried its burden of proving by “clear, unequivocal, and convincing” evi *34 dence which does not leave “the issue in doubt,” that petitioner obtained his citizenship illegally. In so hold ing we do not decide what interpretation of the Party’s attitude toward force and violence is the probable most on present the basis of the or that petitioner’s record* testimony is acceptable at face value. We hold only that where two interpretations of an organization’s program possible, are reprehensible one and a bar to naturali zation and the other permissible, a court in a denatural- ization proceeding, assuming that it can re-examine a finding of attachment upon charge of illegal procure ment, justified is not in canceling a certificate of citizen ship by imputing the reprehensible interpretation to a
159 overt acts absence of in the organization member of So uncer- interpretation. his indicating that such requisite up not add does proof tain chain of convincing” setting evidence for and “clear, unequivocal, otherwise, decree. Were law naturalization aside a rest rights upon reed, would a slender valuable might of our naturalized citizens security of status degree upon political temper considerable depend thought and the majority stresses the times. Those foreign to the consequences best traditions of this of our and the characteristics nation institutions.
II the issues framed disposes by This the Government’s pressed. here complaint which are As additional reasons petitioner’s conclusion that for its naturalization was illegally fraudulently procured, the district court however, found, was a in, disbeliever and a organized organization teaching of an disbelief in, member his allegiance, and that oath of government,53 required 381, was false. These by 8 U. S. C. issues are outside § scope complaint,54 ground urged as is another 53 persons by In 1927 naturalization was forbidden to such 7 of § 598, Compare 1906, the Act of 34 C. 364. 305 Stat. 8 U. S. § § Nationality 1141, 1940, Stat. 8 U. S. Act C. § incorporate complaint cause, did reference an affidavit of required by petition C. in which the affiant averred U. S. § illegally fraudulently obtained, er’s naturalization was man he did not behave as a and was not a man attached to the Con member op stitution but was a Communist which was posed and advocated its the Government overthrow force and violence, and in that: “At the he took said allegiance, time oath of support not in fact intend to he did defend the Constitution and against enemies, foreign all domestic, laws of the United States allegiance to and bear true faith and the same.” part the complaint, we think this affidavit While was not *35 charge, only be additional but was an included intended to show 160 which the district below as to judgment support
in outside they Because findings.55 made no court As we consider them. we do not complaint, scope charge upon “Conviction Jonge Oregon, in v. De said 299 process.” due denial of sheer made would be not a criminal is not A suit denaturalization 353, S.U. ordinary action since is it an civil But neither proceeding. Conse adjudication of status. important an involves limited, as should be think the Government quently we charged in its the matters proceeding, criminal complaint. judgment ground support advanced
One other not by the lower courts and does below was not considered It is that petitioner treatment. was merit detailed deportable naturalization because he was entitled to Immigration (40 Act of 1918 as 1927 under the Stat. § amended 1008 8 C. alien by ; 137) Stat. U. S. organization advocating member of an overthrow of Government of the United States force and violence. prior This issue is answered our discussion of the evi- relating dence in this record to force and violence. As- suming that deportability at the time of naturalization requirement satisfies the illegality § under governs proceeding, the same to establish ade- failure quately the attitude toward force and violence of the compliance with the statute. The attachment of the affi- averment davit specific charge is elaborated complaint. and set forth as a in the The failure per- to do likewise with the averment of a false oath that the issue petitioner suasive was not intended raised. When moved for a non-suit case, at the close of the Government’s the United attorney contend, stating States did not what he conceived were, question issues that the of a false oath was an issue. This contention is that disposed not well good happiness order and of the United States he because believed general illegal and advocated resort action, other than force violence, achieving political as a means ends.
161 his forbids belonged which organizations to membership. ground on denaturalization to remanded the cause is reversed judgment The proceedings further for Appeals Court Circuit opinion. this conformity with
Reversed. concurring: Mb. Justice Douglas, petitioner’s agree that opinion I join the Court’s the Con- in 1927 want of attachment unequivocal by “clear, not been shown stitution has it when seeks States, convincing” evidence. United carries citizenship, American of his deprive person to a unlawfully. it showing procured that he heavy burden of record, present on the not been sustained That burden has the most unless plain, makes opinion of the Court as imputed to be party are extreme within petitioner’s views may which him all doubts or and unless attributed to be resolved concerning exist beliefs his an- But there is him than his favor. against rather type raised of case problem other view of the separate to merit statement. is so basic as the United States gives Naturalization Act Sec. 15 of the to set aside and duty institute actions power ground of “fraud” citizenship on the cancel certificates ground they “illegally procured.” on the were or nothing Sec. “makes fraudulent or unlawful that was imposes honest lawful done. It no new when was penalty upon wrongdoer. if, hearing, But fair after judicially by wrongful ic is determined that conduct he has obtained a title to the act citizenship, provides deprived he shall be privilege right- of a that was never fully States, his.” Johannessen v. United 227, 225 U. S. States, 242-243. And see Luria v. United U. S. “Wrongful conduct” —like the statutory words “fraud” “illegally procured” strong words. Fraud con- —are
CO 7—1 <N falsification, misrepresenta concealment, perjury, *37 They require- included the a issuance of certificate. to the or polygamist not be an anarchist applicant ment that the (United of arrival of a certificate (§7), presentation the the Ness, 245 U. 319), requirement the States v. S. (United Gins- v. States hearing open be had court final (R. requirement S. berg, 243 U. S. 472), the residence be able applicant that the general requirement the 2170), § foregoing The English language (§8), etc. the speak to Congress which type of one of condition are illustrative required the by Another is illustrated specified. type read, it then stated that finding 4, as of attachment. Sec. the satisfaction of the court” appear it be made to to “shall good “has behaved as a man of moral applicant that the the of the Constitution character, principles attached to good well the States, disposed of the United order 2 my happiness Congress of the same.” view that It finding preced- made by provision condition 1 seq. C. 501 et present in its form see 8 Dor Act U. S. § 2 by 2, 1929, provision This was recast the Act of March 45 Stat. substantially 1513-1514, (a) (3), present its form. 8 U. S. C. into § legislative history Cong. 841; Rep. For Rec. No. see S. Cong., provision person, except 70th 2d now Sess. reads: “No provided chapter, as hereinafter shall this be naturalized unless (3) during periods such ... all the referred to in this person good character, subsection has been and still is a moral attached States, to the Constitution disposed good and well happiness order of the United States.” finding. underlying evidence weight
ent, not on 15§ under be set aside course finding can Such “illegally certificates far as But so fraud. grounds per- heretofore has Court concerned, procured” con- express enforce merely to be used mitted 15§ true It is of course in the Act. specified ditions forward to come required citizenship applicant findings. required for the necessary showing make the showing not that Act, was this earlier under § 4. But Congress expressed finding of the court but the be broadened If 15 should § form of condition. findings of attachment judicial permit construction to issue then the fraud, than for reasons other to be set aside being judge not turn on illegality would be made evidence but on the applicant’s satisfied as to attachment finding. should underlying that Such a condition readily implied. may
If an States naturalized, anarchist the United the certificate on bring an action under aside § 15 set 7 of the grounds illegality. Congress § Since *38 Act the alien an- anarchists, forbids the naturalization of illegally it procured archist who obtains the certificate has The same might naturalization find. whatever the court they Congress would be true of if declared communists ineligible should be Then one citizenship. proof that not a communist not party was and did adhere or belief become express its would like the other conditions “jurisdictional” the Act a so-called fact “upon which grant predicated.” States, is Johannessen v. United supra, p. 240. But under Congress this Act did not treat communists like anarchists. Neither the statute nor the official used applicants forms called for an expression by petitioner of his attitude on, or his relationship to, com- munism, any foreign other political creed except an- archy and the like. natu- entrusted to findings of attachment general standard the most only with
ralization court however, only it, guide court has before it. That ap- It makes its witnesses. but at least two applicant Its weighs it the evidence. applicant of the praisal In factors. imponderable often rest on conclusion must not know how far the naturaliza- case we do present beliefs and probed petitioner’s political tion сourt into inquiry not know what All affiliations. We do made. we do know is that it was satisfied that was “attached to the Constitution United But we must finding States.” assume that the judgment granting (cf. which underlies citizenship States, Tutun v. supported by U. S. 568) evidence. must We assume that the evidence embraced all relevant charge facts since no of concealment or mis- representation w;e now made respondent. And must assume that applicant judge and the both acted ut- good most faith.
If the applicant questions answers all required him, if there is no concealment or misrepresentation, findings of attachment cannot be set grounds aside on the illegality in proceedings under § It does not com- port any accepted notion of illegality to say that in spite good of the utmost faith on part of applicant and judge spite of full compliance with the express stat- utory conditions a certificate was illegally procured be- judge cause another would appraise the evidence differ- ently. That would mean that the United States at any time could obtain a trial de novo on the political faith of applicant. Congress hardly
It
conceivable
intended that
*39
Act except
under this earlier
result
for the narrow group
political
anarchy
creeds such as
for which it specially
Hughes
Chief Justice
provided.
stated in his dissent in
Macintosh,
United States v.
Citizenship granted only can be on the basis Tutun v. statutory right Congress has created. States, supra. granted But where it is and where express all the statutory precedent conditions are satisfied we should adhere to the the judgment view that of natu- ralization is final and except conclusive for fraud. Since the United States does not now contend that fraud vitiates judgment certificate the below must be reversed.
Me. Justice Rutledge, concurring: join I in I opinion. only Court’s add what follows emphasize Iwhat think is at the bottom of this case. Immediately we are concerned only man, one William though Schneiderman. Actually, indirectly, *40 If, years a feder- seventeen after millions. affects
decision judg- citizen, him to be entitled adjudged al court stripped this most he can be can ment be nullified upon more reexamination by nothing than precious right, judgment established, no very merits facts If can be citizenship is or secure. person's naturalized length done time, can be after that can be done If it for Schnei- thirty fifty years. or can be done after derman, it can be done for thousands or tens of thousands of others.
For that would produce all be needed would be to some evidence any judges from which one of the federal district concerning could draw a conclusion, one ultimate in issue, facts opposite judge from that drawn de- creeing admission. The not in pre- statute does terms ‘'jurisdictional” scribe But all of important facts.1 ones are “jurisdictional,” if effect, merely or have that drawing contrary though conclusion from the con- same, flicting, at any evidence later time a court can overturn the judgment. An applicant might be today upon admitted evidence satisfying the court he complied had with all requirements. That judgment might be on ap- affirmed peal again on certiorari here. Yet the day after, or ten years later, any judge district could it, overthrow on the same if evidence, it was conflicting gave room for contrary inferences, or on different evidence all of which might have presented been to the first court.2
If this is the law right and the citizen naturalized acquires, his admission creates nothing more than citizen- ship if attenuated, not suspended, animation. He acquires prima but status, facie if that. Until the Gov- 1Cf., however, opinion concurring ante, Douglas, Mr. Justice p. 2There requirement is no that the evidence be different from what presented on “newly admission or discovered.” he knows his certificate ernment to cancel moves And in or out. he know whether he cannot outcome, the harrow- nothing repeating forbids done, when that is the- the weariness of again again, unless ing process *41 judicata. finally speak res courts should lead them his head hanging a threat over No citizen with such belonged organizations If he “off-color” could be free. for perhaps, reactionary or radical too or, views, held too judicial segment of the when admission palate, some his took he place, open could his mouth without fear his him. For against might words would be held whatever he say any organization or whatever such might advocate any could be hauled forth at time “continuity” to show from belief the day admission, of his or “concealment” at time. a citizen Such would not be admitted to lib- erty. His best course would be silence hypocrisy. adjudication. This is not citizenship. Nor is it may It be doubted that the framers of the Consti- tution intended to create two citizens, classes of free one and independent, one haltered with a lifetime string tied to its status. However that may be, and conceding that the power to revoke rightly exists and should exist to some extent, question whether power remains to admit can delegated courts such a way that their determination, once made, determines and concludes nothing with finality.
If every fact issue, going to right to be citizen, a can be reexamined, upon the same or different proof, years or decades later; and if this can be done de novo, ifas no judgment had been entered, whether with respect to the proof burden of required to reach a different decision or otherwise, what does the judgment determine? What it does settle with finality? If review is had and the ad- mission is affirmed, what fact is adjudicated, if next day any or all involved can be redecided to the contrary? Can
I-* determine court to empowered it has when Congress, or later time the same confirm, at review and others to decrees, their any court to overturn trial authorize to over- held have been sufficient other than such as causes other turn decrees?3 Nor questions. these
I
not undertake now to decide
do
the one which
bearing on
they
But
have a
does the Court.
being attacked.
judgment
decided.
It
is a
is
is
States,
Accordingly,
Tutun v.
3
Cf. United States v.
Throckmorton,
61;
98 U. S.
Benson,
Kibbe v.
17 Wall.
No such cause for cancellation is involved here.
4
v. United
States,
when its within is the same this case fore that the trial court’s function the vast ignore admitting as was that of the court is its ad- overturning difference between a judgment, judicated initially facts which deciding upon facts, from the adjudged. argument have not been made deportation ignores this difference. statutes likewise
It say Congress provided is no answer to that redetermination as a part conferring statute right to admission and therefore condition of it. For as a ignores too question whether Congress can so condition the judgment and is but another way saying determination, judicial made an exercise of power under III, Article can be by legislative conditioned mandate so as not to determine finally any ultimate fact in issue.
The effect of cancellation is to nullify
judgment
admission.
If it is a judgment, and no
disputes
one
it is, that
quality
requires
itself
proof
the burden of
the court has
Congress
held that
intended in order to
overturn it. That it is a judgment, and one of at
least
court,
coordinate
which the cancellation proceeding at-
tacks and seeks to overthrow, requires
least,
this much at
that solemn
may
decrees
not be lightly overturned and
that citizens may
be deprived
of their
merely
status
judge
because one
views their political and other beliefs
with a more critical eye or a different slant, however hon-
estly and sincerely, than another. Beyond this we need
not go now in decision. But we do not go beyond our
*43
function or usurp another tribunal’s when we go this far.
7Cf. United
40;
13 How.
Ferreira,
States v.
Gordon v. United
561; Id.,
Wall.
States, 2
697;
117 U. S.
Jones,
United States v.
477;
U. S.
Pocono
Assembly
Pines
73 Ct.
Hotels
States,
Co. v. 447;
Cls.
334;
Ct.
Cls.
parte
Ex
Pocono Pines Assembly Hotels
Co.,
The by doing so Communists, Congress denaturalize may be other naturalized citizens many all or status of underlying need questions put jeopardy. The other compels it. necessity or until not be determined unless dissenting: Stone, MR. Chief Justice at the petitioner, found that The two below have courts naturalized, belonged time he Communist organizations opposed principles which were Constitution, advised, taught advocated and force and violence. overthrow of Government in and They petitioner sup- have found that believed ported organizations. They of those have not, found also that “was at the time of his ., during years naturalization . . of five period immediately natu- preceding filing petition of his ralization had as, person not behaved attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and well disposed good order and happiness of same.”
I think these findings abundantly supported by the evidence, and hence that judicial is not within our competence to set them aside—even though, sitting as trial judges, might we have made some finding. other judgment The below, cancelling petitioner’s citizenship on ground that it was illegally obtained, should there- fore be affirmed. finality which attaches to the trial court’s determinations of fact from evidence heard open court, and which ordinarily saves them from an appellate court’s intermeddling, should not be remembered in every case save this one alone.
It is important emphasize the question for de- cision is much simpler than it has been made to appear. It is whether petitioner, securing his citizenship by naturalization, has fulfilled a condition which Congress *44 naturalization —that for every applicant on imposed has has “he application his preceding years five during the principles the attached to man .. behaved as a . to disposed well States, and of the United Constitution Decision the same.”1 happiness of good order and citizenship entitled to lawfully whether he was now entitled he is whether consequently procured, he of attachment the existence his must turn on to retain it, applied he Constitution when to the principles trier of fact be inferred must and that citizenship, We must during five-year period. from his conduct to compelled court was the district decide not whether warrants but whether record attachment, want of find finding. such a or not of be- petitioner’s opinions then question may have influenced they may explain or
liefs—save as attachment, it, or showing want of to conduct his question It is of not a principles of Constitution. present or or of thought, speech opinion, freedom of from danger acceptance the United States our imminent are not attached of those who to the principles as citizens government. The case obviously form of has noth- of our our relations with where ing Russia, to with do provided: 29,1906, Act By 4 of the of June 34 Stat. § appear court It shall be made satisfaction “Fourth. citizenship preceding admitting any immediately the date alien continuously he within the application his has resided United States least, years Territory the State such court five at and within where least, year during held one at and that that time he has is at the time character, good moral behaved a man attached to as States, disposed good well of the Constitution of the United same. In happiness order and addition to the oath of the testimony witnesses, at applicant, the least two citizens of the character, residence, States, to the facts of moral at- principles of the Constitution required, tachment to the shall be residence, name, place occupation eaсh witness shall be forth in the record.” set
was or with born, past present our or views Russian political system. the or social The United has States same demanding interest other nations who those seek its citizenship some measure of attachment to its institutions. Our only concern is that the will declared of Congress shall prevail man no become a shall —that citizen or retain his citizenship whose behavior for five years before his application not does show attachment to of the Constitution. on has conferred Congress
The Constitution the exclu authority to uniform prescribe governing rules sive natu I, 8, Congress § Article cl. 4. ralization. has exercised by power prescribing conditions, conformity may obtain the privilege to which aliens of citizenship. and Constitution of Under laws States, United no any person given right is to citizenship, demand save compliance with upon those “An conditions. who alien rights political seeks as a member of this Nation can rightfully only obtain them upon terms and conditions specified Congress. Courts by authority without to changes sanction their modifications; duty rigidly to legislative enforce the will in respect of a matter vital so public welfare.” United States Ginsberg, v. 243 472, 474. U. And whenever person’s right S. a citizen ship drawn question, it judge’s is the duty loyally to see those conditions not have been dis regarded. by United present States, suit peti- cancel granted certificate of previously citizenship,
tioner’s was brought Congress (§ pursuant to an 15 of Act Act 29, 601), 34 1906, long June Stat. prior enacted petitioner’s naturalization. Section 15 any authorizes court a suit instituted the United States Attorney to set aside certificate ground a of naturalization “on the fraud ground or on the that such certificate of citizen- illegally ship procured.” Until Court, now this with-
173 suit held that many times has voice, dissenting out a to render court duty of the it is this statute under if of naturalization certificate cancelling judgment did applicant evidence upon finds court prerequi had made Congress conditions satisfy United v. Johannessen citizenship. the award site to 9;S. 231 U. States, United Luria v. 227; States, 225 U. S. States United 714; U. States, 232 S. United v. Maibaum Ness, v. States United 472; Ginsberg, U. S. v. States, 23; U. S. United v. Maney 319; U. S. States, 311 U. S. Schwinn v. awarding judgment review for such a
Provision Congress *46 legislative power is citizenship within infirmity, no constitutional subject to is plainly especially States, 236-40, supra, Johannessen v. citizen- petitioner’s here, the statute antedated where, as its award. a condition of was thus the review ship and have States, 24. decisions supra, Our Luria v. United power to Congress, which has that recognized uniformly safeguard the altogether, may to aliens deny citizenship and vital to the individual grant privilege, precious of this for determin- country’s welfare, by procedure to such ing requisites citizenship to indispensable the existence of slight- as has been 15. “No alien has § established require- right statutory est to naturalization unless all with; every ments of citizen- complied certificate ship granted must that upon be treated as condition may challenge provided Government it in § 15 and demand its cancellation unless issued in accordance with such requirements. If procured prescribed when quali- fications have no existence in it illegally fact procured; a manifest by judge mistake supply cannot nor these render their existence non-essential.” United States v. Ginsberg, supra, 475. Speaking unanimous Court, Mr. Justice Brandéis thus was, stated what until today, the settled “If law: a certificate is procured pre- when the no qualifications fact, may
scribed existence in have States, Tutun United be suit.” v. canсelled 270 U. S. 568, Congress has not seen fit interpose any statute suggestion of limitations. And there is no that derelict, bringing Government was suit earlier or that has been prejudiced by delay. Hence the issue before isus whether when petitioner, naturalized, satisfied statutory It requirements. the same issue as presented would be appeal from judgment granting denying naturalization upon the evidence here presented, although it assumed may be in this proceeding the proof burden of on the rests Gov ernment, which has brought suit, establish peti tioner’s want of qualifications.
We need not stop petitioner’s to consider whether failure, his proceeding, naturalization disclose facts which could have application, resulted in a denial his constituted fraud within the meaning of the statute. For present purposes enough it is supports that the evidence conclusion want courts below as to petitioner’s and, attachment the principles Constitution, ever § since has, its enactment been con- strued by this requiring Court as certificates of citizen- ship to illegally procured cancelled as whenever the court finds on evidence at the time of naturaliza- *47 tion the applicant did not the satisfy statutory fact prerequisites. exigencies
To meet the this case, of it is now for the first time proposed by concurring the of opinion Mr. Douglas given Justice that a new construction to the statute which would preclude any concerning inquiry the fact of petitioner’s attachment to It the Constitution. is said in a 15 inquiry § that the proceeding only permit- fraud, from ted, apart regularity to the of is as the nat- uralization their proceedings on face: that —however much re- meeting statutory fell short of the quirements for citizenship filed, did, pro as he forma he—-if the stating affidavits two that he met persons, barely statutory requirements moral character residence, the if on attachment to the the court Constitution, requisite findings basis of the made affidavits the then all order, inquiry further foreclosed. is easy for proposal To this the emasculation of the statute plain there several and obvious answers. in-
Section 15 the to authorizes and directs Government naturalization stitute the suit to cancel the certificate certifi- ground ground on the or on fraud been cate Until now it has never illegally procured. was one citizenship thought procured that a certificate of for citi- statutory who conditions has satisfied But con- lawfully is zenship, procured. nevertheless opinion Douglas suggests that, for curring of Mr. Justice principles' “attachment purposes § becoming a citizen. is not a condition of Constitution” though satisfied, is the statute even suggests It in fact attached never applicant was made attachment was such Constitution, long so as affidavits, the satisfaction forma pro from appear, case is said to be This naturalization court. cer- affidavits, and the in fact the of whether regardless wholly them, are based on citizenship tificate of mistaken-/ proceeding, naturalization the fact that despite proceeding parte ex here, apparently not represented. the Government Congress strange passing It seem would —which citizenship § under cancellation authorized court hearing open the naturalization to hold failure Gins- (United States v. chambers judge’s instead present requisite certifi- berg, supra), for failure States, country (Maney in this v. of arrival cate *48 supra) thought ap- less concerned —should attachment plicant's of the Constitution and that good hap- he be well disposed to the order and of the piness United States. For what could be more in important the selection of citizens of the United States than prospective prin- that the citizen be attached to the ciples of the Constitution? if in
Moreover, finding the absence of fraud the naturalization in court this case is and hence beyond final proceeding, reach of a final equally § would be in the finding, case of a to the actual contrary fact, applicant years had been five a continuous resi- dent States, requirement United since that too set forth provides the sentence of § “it shall be made court.” appear to the satisfaction Yet it on is settled that a certificate of citizenship based finding subject a mistaken years five residence is Ginsberg, supra. revocation. United States v. And States, supra, Schwinn it appeared, v. from ex- trinsic that the proceeding, § evidence first offered a 15 at hearing witnesses the naturalization had been mistaken length as to the they applicant, of time had known the part five-year that for a had period no witness produced knowledge been with actual of the applicant’s qualifications. dissent, residence or We held, without 311 U. S. “that the certificate of il- citizenship was legally procured,” judg- for that reason we affirmed cancelling ment If lan- give it.2 we are to effect to the guage purpose Congress, it would seem we reach must the same result the case of naturaliza- tion court's mistaken or unwarranted finding of attach- ment to the principles though of the Constitution, even 2 illegal district court’s decision was based on both fraud ity. appeals The circuit upon court of relied alone, fraud 112 F. 2d 74, but our ground” affirmance was “on illegality. rested the sole
177 nat- at witnesses and his applicant of the the conduct of hearing perjury. fell short uralization authorizes 11,§ that of 15—like § purpose proceeding naturalization in a appear to the Government merely to insure not application to contest —is protect to but proceeding, of the regularity formal from result would injury which from United States lawfully not who any as citizens acceptance natural- left the Congress citizens. become to entitled by permitting inexpensive, simple proceeding ization approxi- Thus parte. ex to be conducted ordinarily it were issued of naturalization certificates mately 200,000 a citizen. became year in which during the p. Secretary Labor, 1940, of the Report Annual an inde- the Government Congress 15 afforded But § inquire any into naturalization opportunity pendent certificate it scrutiny appeared if later upon the Court As lawfully procured. had been citizenship not Ness, supra, States v. 327, “§ United declared against designed protection afford 15 were cumulative § made All illegal naturalization.” fraudulent than more this Court abundantly clear decisions of States, v. United See Johannessen ago. twenty-five years States, United States v. supra; Luria United supra; v. Ness, supra, 325-27. Ginsberg, supra; States v. revised intervening Congress In has often years it thought appropriate laws, naturalization but has not function of of the modify interpretation this Court’s in the naturalization procedure. § 15 now §of interpretation persuasive This is It is Congress. will of purpose defies proposed that a have intended Congress should inconceivable attachment citizen’s naturalized requirement fundamental most Constitution —the which, the absence one issue be the citizenship —should examining. from is foreclosed fraud, the Government such cases proof fraud To limit the Government every instance “illegality” is to read out statute demonstrably to the principles an where alien attached a certificate citizen- procured of the Constitution has Congress if ship. we were to recast Act Even own it would be policy, accordance our notions warranting difficult any to discover considerations *50 adoption only to device whose effect would be make persons certain that never entitled to the benefits of could citizenship and retain secure them. That could object not have been the Congress enacting § 15. considering As we not here petitioner’s whether by certificate of naturalization was there procured fraud, is no occasion, justification, and indeed no importing for into this rule, case the derived from cases, land fraud 'fraud, personal which involves moral obliquity, must be proved by convincing clear and The evidence. issue not is whether petitioner committed a crime but whether he enjoy should be to permitted citizenship has never when he satisfied the basic conditions which for Congress required grant privilege. only of that are concerned We question petitioner’s qualifications whether were so lacking that he not lawfully entitled the privilege to citizenship which he has procured. nothing There is any § nor in of our numerous decisions it, under to sug- gest that such an issue is to be tried tried, as fraud is it not. to be resolved, as are other cases, by the weight of plausible evidence. No reason has been ad- vanced it why should not be. But the point need not be labored, for no matter it how is determined give it can no aid or comfort to petitioner. The evidence this case to which I shall refer and on which the courts below were entitled to rely clear, not speculative; peti- since tioner himself has challenged not it, the trial court was evidently it which convincing, as to accept entitled did. require suggested, to be not, seems
The statute does as merely capable man be that a citizenship as a condition of re- Constitution —a principles attachment to the satisfy. mankind could all presumably quirement in fact attached requires applicant It that the instead naturalization, 15§ those when he seeks principles in- an for to institute provision makes Government naturalization, inquire subsequent dependent suit, then fact fulfilled. Con- whether that condition was capabilities. gress petitioner’s exhibited no interest has impossible Congress require only Nor did it be have attachment petitioner to specifies The Act the fact attach- the Constitution. affirmatively requiring ment this to be test, shown by Congress by the a means provided § applicant; judicial for the United States ascertain that fact determination. prescribed conditions for the award of citizenship understood, readily naturalization are few and *51 expression Congres-
we must them as the of the accept judgment not satisfying require- that aliens those sional worthy privilege are not ments to be admitted to the before one citizenship. has declared that Congress oath al- entitled to that must take the privilege he legiance support “that he will defend the Constitu- enemies, all against tion and laws of United States allegiance domestic, bear true faith and foreign and (Third), 34 Stat. 1906, 4 29, § same.” Act of June to the ap- must make said, apрlicant And I have 597. citizenship him to admitting to the court pear he application the date his years preceding the five States within United continuously resided has good man has behaved as that time he during “that [00] o
moral character, attached to the the Con- stitution of the States, United disposed well to the good order and happiness of the same.”
Moreover, at the time of petitioner’s naturalization, the statutes of the United States excluded from admis sion into country “aliens in, advise, who believe ad vocate, teach, or or who are members of or affiliated any organization, association, society, or that be group, in, lieves advises, advocates, or teaches: (1) the over throw force or violence of the Government of the United States . . .” Act of 16, 1918, October 401,§ 1012, Stat. as amended by subsection (c) the Act of June 5, 41 Stat. 1008, 1009. 1920, The statutes also barred admission United States of “aliens who . . . knowingly circulate, distribute, print, or display, or know ingly cause to be circulated, distributed, printed, pub lished, or displayed . any . . written or printed matter . . advising, . advocating, teaching: (1) the overthrow by force or violence of the Government of the United Ibid., States . . .” (d). subsection And § Act of October 1918, it was provided any alien who, entering after the United States, “is found ... have become thereafter, a of any member one of the classes just of aliens” enumerated, shall be into taken custody deported. See Strecker, Kessler 307 U. S. v. Quite apart from the want of attachment Constitution and consequent disqualification of such aliens for citizenship, their belonging to any of these classes would disqualify them for citizenship since their presence in the States, without which they can apply for citizenship, would be unlawful. And in light presently to be discussed— evidence — even the opinion Court’s 153) concedes (p. “We do not *52 say that a reasonable man could not possibly found, have as the did, district court that in Communist actively urged by overthrow of the Government makes evidence addition, In force and violence.” up petitioner, that doubt all reasonable beyond it clear know- alien who an naturalization, was of his to the time circulated caused to distributed, or or circulated ingly overthrow advocating the matter distributed, printed force or violence. by Government judg- statute, deportation from the Wholly apart justi- was the trial court because be affirmed ment should had in not and 1927, was petitioner, that finding fied of the Constitution. principles not been attached there are deny do not majority My brethren Congress the Constitution. principles for natu- requiring applicant the statute passed which . . . as a man that he has “behaved to establish ralization (1 Stat. the Constitution” principles of attached For some not doubt that there were. evidently did 414), in the Convention. members had sat Constitutional of its I shall that there any disclaimer assume In the absence among and that them are at least principles are such rights civil protection of constitutional principle property, principle representa- life, liberty principle and the tive that constitutional government, by be broken down planned laws are not to disobedience. I also all the of the Constitution assume dictatorship rule; minority are hostile and that change of our Constitution or- principle ganization government our be effected the or- derly procedures ordained and not Constitution by force or With in mind, may fraud. these we examine petitioner’s bеhavior disclosed by during the record, years the five his preceded naturalization, order to ascertain whether there was basis the evidence for judge’s findings. the trial In determining whether there finding evidence supporting petitioner’s want of attachment to constitutional principles, courts must look, as the statute admonishes, to see whether the five-
[00] to the as man attached behaved year period recognize And we must the Constitution. of principles it personal want attribute is a attachment that such facts and circumstances from all relevant to be inferred petitioner’s reveal attitude toward those which tend to principles.
. intelligent man, Petitioner, who is educated and eighteen in 1924, out first when he papers took his was 10, years of was June age, citizenship and admitted on nearly twenty-two. when Since 1927, year his sixteenth continuously been actively engaged pro- he has moting way one or another the interests various Party organizations Communist affiliated with and con- policy trolled as to their action the Third Inter- national, parent Communist organization, which had headquarters its and its Executive Committee in Moscow.3
3During period litigation, whole relevant to this Communist Party organization, was a world known Communist as the Third (or Comintern), International created of which the Com country munist Parties in each gov supreme were sections. The erning body of the Third Communist International —which exer Party cised control program, organization tactics and —was Congress World the Communist International. Between meet ings Congress authority its was vested in the Com Executive mittee the Communist International. The resolutions of Con gress, meetings and between those Committee, Executive were binding on all sections. In the Party United States Workers America, organization, a Communist was established 1921. It was affiliated with the International, Communist and had sent dele gates Congress Third World of the International earlier in year. continued, Party The Workers of America has been since and successively known as the (Communist) Party Workers Communist Party of the United States America. The of. Party representatives sent accredited to the Communist Interna recognized tional and leadership of the International. was It International, with the Third affiliated sec constituted a litigation All tion. the events with which this is concerned occurred long prior May to the dissolution the Comintern in to the Communist loyalty petitioner’s shows evidence he Party member of that as a organizations; Party control, political its accepted subject to and political to its his adherence member as a constitution. by its required tactics was *54 1905, August 1, on born Russia was Petitioner 1922, In to the States came in Los night high school at a 16-year old student when a organizers and charter the he became one Angeles, League California. Young the Workers members of during five-year period the years Por two or three —and director examining was educational which we are —he organize forums and duty “to it was his League; register was to students “My job for classes.” studies in other meetings; notices for the classes and send out League words, organize to the educational activities of supplied.” were The outlines for which instructors estab- program the curriculum of this educational were League League’s lished national committee. The (whose changed to Young name was later Communist League) was affiliated with the Communist International.4 In just naturalized, after he was became petitioner “organizer” League or “dirеctor” offi- was the —“I spokesman cial League for the adminis- directed its political trative and affairs and educational affairs.” delegate Petitioner was a League’s to the Con- National Young Com Young League The Workers was with the affiliated munist It sent International and the Communist International. It delegates Congress Young to the International. Communist delegates to closely Party, was also related to the and sent Workers Party Party Convention, Conventions. At its Third National adopted following resolution: Communism, reaching youth message task
“The interesting organizing them in mili- our cause and them for the struggle against oppression and existing tant social order and its major exploitation importance Communist move- is of whole pre- carrying League is Young In on this Workers ment. work the th oo Meanwhile, on in 1925. again in 1922, and
vention intention declaration of February he had filed a 8, 1924, to become a citizen of the United States. Party joined the Workers 1924, petitioner
At the end of (which Com- changed later its name Workers Party Communist Party munist later to the still America). Party The section United States of Party at constitution, the Third International. (Article member, provided the time became a 1) “every III, person accepts the principles § who agrees and tactics of the Workers of America Party discipline engage actively submit its its work eligible shall be membership.” Applicants for mem- bership (Article required III, 2) were sign § an appli- reading cation card as undersigned follows: “The de- his clares adherence to the principles and tactics of the Workers of America expressed program its *55 and agrees constitution and to submit to the discipline of the party engage and to in actively its work.” It was provided likewise (Article 1, 2) X, §§ that “all decisions of the governing bodies of the Party shall binding be upon membership the and subordinate organi- units of the zation,” and “any member or organization violating the Party decisions of the shall subject to suspension or expulsion.”5 During 1925 and 1926 petitioner was “cor- paring fighters the for Communism who will ranks soon stand in the Party part fighters.” as of its best Party Second Year Report of the Workers of America. of The Central Executive Committee to the Third National Conven- tion. Held in- Chicago, Illinois, 31, 1, 2, Dec. and 1923 Jan. Theses, Program, Depart- Resolutions. Published the Literature ment, Party America, Workers Chicago, of St., N. State Ill. (p. 122.) 5 Program Constitution, and Party Adopted Workers of America. Convention, City, at National New York December 24-25-26-27, Convention, Chicago, 1921. Amended at Ill., National December 30- Party in Los secretary” the responding Workers of and sent minutes Angeles. down the he wrote such, As meetings; he letter which for out communications signed secretary” “city indicates capacity central in as his correspondence outgoing charge with in was that he Party Party. In he attended affiliates convention. attended Sixth naturalization,
After his Congress International, at Communist World district 1930 he was from 1929 to Moscow, 1928; Party organizational secretary district which for a At various Nevada and California. included Arizona, organizer subsequent in Connecti- he was district times He ran twice Minnesota, California. cut, governor Party’s He Minnesota. candidate Party, positions in the time at held other official hearing in district State court was California Secretary and a member of the Central State directly probative facts, These while Committee. during five-year period 1922-1927, at his behavior early Party organi- least establish that his devotion to the gen- transitory, nor wаs not zations inconsistent his settled convictions. uine and and it
The evidence shows is not denied that the Com- Party organization question at munist the time revolutionary having party generally, as its ultimate aim England particularly and the States, capitalistic government, overthrow and the substitu- dictatorship proletariat. sought for it of the tion It *56 accomplish through persistent this indoctrination of people capitalistic Party principles, with countries organization by the in those countries of sections of 31, 1923, January 1,1924. Department, Published Literature Party America, Washington Boulevard, Workers Chi W. cago, HI. teaching Party prin- International, by systematic
Third auspices, Party meetings at held under ciples classes lit- distribution of Communist publication basic erature constituted one of the Party action.
In with at policy accordance established its Second brought Congress Party press World through Party ownership under control of the various publication agencies. Strict adherence Party prin- ciples publications, was demanded re- of all which were quired by Party be edited of proved loyalty members proletarian to the required revolution. Propaganda was to conform program and decisions of the Third International. Editors were removed and mem- Party bers expelled for noncompliance. con- Publications not forming to Party principles Party were barred from classes. Party publications Communist
Many such were intro- large and constitute a part at the trial duced evi- case. Perusal record dence can leave no petitioner’s unqualified loyalty doubt of to the Commu- Party. His continuous nist services great in a twenty variety years capacities, and his familiarity Party programs and literature, con- vincing of his proof complete devotion to Communist Party principles, and his desire to advance them. Throughout diligent has he been a student of Party publi- Many cations. of them were used in the Communist classes which he was educational director in years immediately preceding his naturalization. All par- were ticularly brought to his attention they were introduced in evidence and excerpts relative to the issues were dis- in open cussed court. Except as may be later noted, he deny did not familiarity with them or disavow their teach- ings. They were the official exposition of the doctrines the Party to which he had formally pledged his alie- *57 indoctrina- him for the by diligently disseminated giance, of members the countrymen, especially of his fellow tion In the circum- Party. the organizations Youth any disavowal in the absence of stances, especially and him by ignorance assertion or the by petitioner persuasive they they proclaimed, which principles want attach- extent his nature and evidence appraising In the Constitution. ment to principles in some- it will most useful to state aspect in this be them of these teachings publi- form some of the summary what Con- principles to of the cations, classified with reference a few they relate, give typical and to to which stitution from the many given more could be examples, which evidence. only I refer to those noted,
Unless otherwise shall published petitioner was familiar and which were which by publica- Party of the and official auspices under the its agencies. tion ultimate said,
As I have it is questioned years pre- aim of 1927 and Communist of the ceding triumph prole- was the dictatorship consequent capitalistic tariat and the overthrow of bоurgeois government to such society. Attachment dictatorship hardly can indicate thought be attach- to government ment of an instrument of which forbids rule of dictatorship precludes the minority or suppression minority rights dic- by government. points tatorial But the Government es- by methods which that end was to pecially such who or advocate pursue achieved show those prin- their of attachment methods exhibit want sys- repeatedly Methods ciples Constitution. Party litera- advocated, in the Communist tematically up softening include first a referred, which I have ture disintegration of the breakdown and process systematic to be achieved capitalistic governments general laws, second, resort to violation of *58 force and governments by of capitalistic the overthrow violence. for most countries, that “For all even proclaimed
It was of a in the sense lesser ‘legal’ ‘peaceful’ free and ones arrived, in struggle, period acuteness the class has absolutely necessary every when has become for Com join unlawful party systematically munist to lawful and organization. The work, lawful and unlawful . . . class struggle country Europe in and America every almost of entering the of war. Under such conditions phase is civil in laws. can no confidence bourgeois have Communists They illegal everywhere appara should create a parallel duty by do at the decisive moment should its tus, way in assist the revolution. party, every possible every country In law consequence of martial where, of unable to exceptional laws, other the Communists are on carry lawfully, their work a lawful and combination of necessary.” “Opposition unlawful work is absolutely pp. 18, 28, See of Statutes, Theses and Admission to Conditions of Adopted Congress the Communist by International. the Second of International, July August Communist 7,1920. 17 to The edition of this present document evidence in the case published was March, 1923, auspices under the Party America, Workers following contained the statement on the inside front cover: Party
“The Workers sympathy its with declares struggle Communist against International and enters the Amer- powerful ican capitalism, capitalist the most groups, under inspiration leadership of the Communist International. ” “It rallies to the call ‘Workers of the World Unite/ Petitioner testified that he had no particular recollection of “this edition” but “I have no doubt possibly pamphlet” like it Party was sold in bookstores. This document was marked for identifi- cation and the court later denied a motion to exclude it and other exhibits from During the evidence. petitioner’s the trial counsel twice referred having to the document put been in evidence. Peti- tioner’s it, counsel with all included other exhibits in evidence or identification, designation offered for in his record to be made an unwill (illegal) work underground to principle for a Com necessity absolute to understand ingness was work” illegal legal combining Party munist mi Party from expulsion ground one in fact was generally illegal conduct Advocacy faction.7 nority illegality. types advocacy particular accompanied “mass vio to workers arouse instructed in wherever “whenever injunction of an lation” 8 In the against strikers.” courts issued junction tactics unlawful question now period literature government directed toward particularly were unlawful “systematic In addition armed forces. on unlawful necessary carry “it work,” especially *59 par Refusal to army, navy, police.”9 in the аnd work in and systematic ticipate “persistent propaganda and revo in to agitation” army “equal the treason was by up appeals. in order the circuit court of It was included so failing formally Despite oversight the court. the Government’s in say evidence, obviously being that was introduced in to exhibit parties by was to in evidence deemed be both the and trial court. competent unquestionably evidence, exhibit is The relevant and part it became of the record before the courts below. 7 p. (Com 94 The 4th National See Convention of the Workers Party munist) Chicago, August Ill., 21-30,1925. of America. in Held by Washington Daily Publishing Published Co., 1113 W. Worker Blvd., publisher’s Chicago, The Ill. notice inside the back cover pamphlet “absolutely indispensable any stated that this was to mem party.” pamphlet, report ber of the which was the official convention, by Party Angeles sold and circulated in Los familiarity 1925. Petitioner disclaimed with the of this literature convention, that he had but testified attended the He convention. agreement general he program prin also testified was with the ciples (Communist) Party. the Workers part p. adopted unanimously Ibid. This was resolution, 107. of a by Party Convention, relating “Party Policies for Trade Union Work.” 9Statutes, Theses and Conditions Admission to the Communist (see 6, supra), p. International note with affiliation with lutionary incompatible cause, International,” and this because “it Third is neces army things,
sary, destroy above all undermine bourgeoisie.”11 order to overcome documentary There evidence is abundant of the char- acter already support finding described court’s the Communist organizations, petitioner diligently was a member, printed circulated matter which advocated the overthrow Government of the United States violence, force and aided advocacy. that circulation and From beginning, and during relevant inquiry, all times this there is evidence Party organizations the Communist advocated governments capitalistic overthrow of by revolution to if accomplished, be, need by force of arms. We need not stop to consider the much question discussed whether than meant more that force was to be if used estab- governments misguided lished should be so as to refuse to make themselves over proletarian into dictatorships governmental amendment their structures, or should effrontery have the to defend themselves from lawless subversive attacks. For case the end any contemplated was the overthrow government, and the measures ad- vocated force and were violence.
10 Ibid. p. 11 AB Communism, C of p. by 69. This was written N. Bueliarin Preobraschensky, English & E. in 1919, into in June, 1921, translated published and Lyceum-Literature by between 1920 and 1924 De partment, Party of America, Workers Broadway, New York 799 City. There evidence pamphlet was was a basic work of Party study classes in 1924 1925; expressly that was designed for purposes, officially such by was circulated the Party, and was still by Library advertised the Workers Publishers in 1928. Petitioner testified that he read the had work and was familiar it, although he said expelled had authors later been from the Russian Party. Communist the Com- principles, Communist The fountainhead in Engels 1848, by Marx and Manifesto, published munist ends could be that Communist proclaimed openly had existing all forcible overthrow of by the “only attained teachings were re- After 1920 these conditions.” social Party which, publications restated vived and considering, now were used the Commu- period we are directing. program nist educational im- They recognized proletarian that “the revolution bourgeois of the possible without violent destruction governmental putting machine and the of a new one that “the of the dictatorship proletariat its cannot place”; peaceful development bourgeois be the result society and it can be the democracy; only result of the bourgeois army destruction machine, State bourgeois apparatus administrative and the whole bour- geois political that “the system”; of the dictatorship pro- born not bourgeois letariat of the state of but things, of its destruction after the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, of expropriation of landed proprietors and capitalists, of the socialization of the essential instruments and means production, development of proletarian revo- through lution violence. The dictatorship prole- tariat is the revolutionary power resting on violence against the bourgeoisie.”12
Petitioner testified that at the time of his naturalization he subscribed the philosophy and principles of social- ism as manifested the writings of Lenin. The State Leninism, by Theory Stalin, pp. 33, 32, Practice 30-31. Party Daily of America the Workers Worker Published pamphlet This Publishing Co., Chicago, Ill. was used in Communist 1924 and and was Party classes in circulated the Literature Party Communist Department bookshops. sold in published copies January August were between thousand Five 1, 1925.
bO CO Revolution, which Lenin, by and De the Literature by circulated which was and familiar, and in 1924 and 1925 Party partment Communist neces “The classes, declared: Party used by Communist this the masses fostering among systematically sity of lies about violent revolution of view only point teaching, Engels’ whole of Marx’s the root of the at agitation just neglect propaganda of such and it is Social-Chauvinists predominant by present both into brings betrayal of it their the Kautskian schools 13 might no in order that there be relief.” And prominent “revolution,” Engels’ defi misunderstanding of the term follows: nition was revived and restated as of revolution part population which “Revolution is act parts by rifles, bay its will on the other means of forces And means. cannon, e., by i. most authoritative onets, inevitably forced to maintain its conquering party supremacy by means of that fear which its arms inspire 14 “That which victory the reactionaries.” before the proletariat seems but a theoretical difference of opin ion question ‘democracy,’ on the inevitably becomes the victory, question on the morrow of only can by decided force of arms.” working “The class cannot gen victory bourgeois by over the achieve means of alone, policy eral strike folded arms. The proletariat must uprising.” resort to an armed say “To the revolution can be achieved without civil war is say that a revolution ‘peaceful’ possible. . . . Marx was a believer civil war —that is, struggle armed April, edition, P. new 1924. Published for the Workers Daily Chicago, Publishing America III. Co., Worker 14Ibid., p. 44. 15Statutes, Theses and Conditions of Admission to Communist (see 6, supra), p. International note 16Ibid., p. 36.
193 teach . . . The bourgeoisie. against proletariat It seriously. very revolution took the of Socialism ers not convert could proletariat to them that was clear im to have would the workers and that bourgeoisie, war carried through a their enemies upon will pose their 17 bayonets.” guns on and by were publications and other teachings in this The principle a universal of arms was by that revolution force States, embraced consequently one which tаught in when Com- intended to do so obviously publi- Communist munist the United States. classes “Marx’s out that point to pains were at cations evidence has furnished the the ‘continent’ regard limitation with country pre- with a every opportunists and mensheviks of a the possibility Marx admitted asserting text for pro- into bourgeois democracy peaceful transformation of (Eng- some countries democracy, at least letariat [in] these America). . . But now situation land and . has reached Imperialism radically different. countries bureaucracy and there militarism apogee there, its no consequence In Marx’s restriction sovereign. longer applies.”18 petitioner’s
In determine whether behavior order to the Consti- established his attachment political system entitled to consider the tution, we are to establish and toward which Party proposed which his promoting own efforts Communist cause were his directed. About there is and can be no serious dis- system existing the new pute. prin- Under constitutional In government abandoned. the new ciples were to be by guaran- the freedoms Communists, be established (see 12, supra), pp. 109-10. A B C of Communism note (see Leninism, Theory and Practice note The Stalin p. Revolution, by supra), To the same see The State and 32. effect (note 13, supra), p. Lenin
.194 There “. . . ended. Rights the Bill of were to be
teed dictator- everybody. ‘freedom’ The can no talk of for freedom with the incompatible ship proletariat necessary bourgeoisie. dictatorship is, in fact, bourgeoisie them deprive freedom, of their to chain absolutely impossible hand foot order make fight them to There revolutionary proletariat.” was to be confiscation of “immediate unconditional big and “no the estates of the landowners and landlords” *63 can in the propaganda be admitted ranks of the Com- parties in indemnity munist favor an to be paid 20 large owners of for their expropriation.” estates The state “representatives new include ruling former classes.”21 “The dictatorship pro- ‘complete democracy letariat cannot be democracy, for all, rich poor for it has to be a alike; State that is democratic, only proletariat but property- and the for less, a State that dictatorial, only against is but the bour- geoisie.’ . . . the dictatorship Under proletariat, democracy proletarian: it democracy for exploited majority, based on limitation of the rights of the ex- 22 minority ploiting and directed against this minority.”
The aims of the Communists could be only achieved “the annihilation of the bourgeois entire governmental apparatus, parliamentary, judicial, military, bureaucratic, administrative, municipal,” and was necessary for the Communists “to break and destroy” the “apparatus.”23 The annihilation of the political existing structure was
19 B (see A C of Communism supra), pp. 65-66. 11, note 20Statutes, Theses and Conditions of Admission to the Communist (see International 6, supra), p. note 82. 21 Ibid., p. Theory and Practice of Leninism, by (see Stalin note supra), pp. 31-32. 23Statutes, Theses and Conditions of Admission to the Communist (see International 6, supra), note pp. 11,44. in the United as elsewhere.24 necessary
deemed States If directed to public elected to office Communist was existing “facilitate “ap this task of destruction” “bourgeois organizations” were to paratus,” since the State them.” only object destroying be utilized “with the teach- unnecessary give It is further examples ings organizations which the Party of Communist through dоcumentary through. Ap- evidence is shot pended opinion excerpts to this from two exhibits. These have been more chosen, they prove not because than only they others but because form express short permeate ideas which evidence, whole, all. The as a mentioned, the exhibits which we have especially finding show a basis in the Party teachings, during period in question, unqualified hostility to the most recognized fundamental universally Constitution. argument On the we were admonished change favored our government, form of which is itself a principle of the Constitution, since the Constitution provides for amendment, its own and that in any case the Communist had greatly modified its *64 aims more years. recent It is true the Constitu- that tion provides for its own amendment by orderly pro- cedure but not through the govern- breakdown of our mental system by lawless / conduct and It can force. hardly satisfy the requirement of “attachment to the 1 principles of the Constitution” that one is attached the_/ means for its destruction. And whether at some tune after 1927 the Party may have abandoned doctrines these — is immaterial.
It would be little short preposterous to assert thaT) vigorous aid knowingly given by pledged a member/ Party 18, supra. See note
25Statutes, Theses and Conditions of Admission to the Communist (see supra),
International note pp. 44, 45,46. which reference teachings, Party disseminating with attachment made, compatible has been us before On the record principles of the Constitution. peti- that judge trial to conclude it would be difficult that he member of tioner not aware was a well taught the over- aiding and advocated party of the United States force throw of the Government violence. would be difficult also to find a fact It as vand petitioner prin- that behaved as a man attached to the ciples The trial he judge Constitution. found that did not. And the same evidence would seem to furnish plain enough support for the judge’s finding trial further petitioner did not behave man as a attached “to the good order happiness” of the United States. Party to Communist pledge of adherence
Petitioner’s in the Com- tactics, membership his passive nor indolent. organizations, were neither munist during clearly years the crucial testimony His shows young vigorous strong he man of intellect and con- was a time spent actively arranging victions. He his for the gospel dissemination of a of which he never has asserted ignorance either or disbelief. His acquaintance wide Party literature, promotion zealous in- his for many years, preclude terests the supposition that he did not know the character teachings of its and did not aid in their advocacy. They persuasive that he was with- out attachment to the constitutional principles which teachings those aimed to destroy. Yet opin- Court’s ion seems to tell us that the trier of fact must not examine petitioner’s gospel to find out what kind of man he was, or even gospel what his was; the trier of fact could “impute” any genuine attachment organizations doctrines these whose teachings he so assiduously spread. might It well be said that it is *65 impossible to infer that a man is attached to the principles religious a movement from the fact that he conducts example, sinister a more or, to take meetings, prayer its con- a man is Nazi be inferred it could not who, principles to constitutional attached sequently not doc- circulated diligently had years, for more than five Kampf. of Mein trines It inference inevitable.
In neither of course is case be normal, for one to not possible, though probable is those, diametrically opposed attached to principles ef- his best given of which he has life’s the dissemination inference which the fort. But it is a normal sensible attachment is to those fact to make that his trier of is free principles principles rather than to- constitutional A man can known the ideas they at war. he And company keeps. he spreads as well as given that he challenge proof when one does not has spreading ideas, his life to class of well-defined particular convincing evidence that his attachment is to them In convincing rather than their this case it opposites. petitioner, naturalization, evidence that at the time of his was not entitled citizenship procured to the he because he attached to the of the Constitution States and because he disposed was not well good happiness to the order and same.
Mb. Justice Roberts and Mb. Justice Frankfurter join in this dissent.
APPENDIX. Statutes, Exhibit from Theses and Con- Excerpts 26— to the Communist of Admission Interna- ditions (see 6, supra): note tional put its International makes aim
“The Communist Interna- struggle for the overthrow of the up an armed International bourgeoisie tional create an Soviet stage complete as a transition abolition Republic International considers the the State. Communist for the dictatorship proletariat only as the means capitalism. from the humanity liberation horrors *66 form considers Soviet International Communist form of historically evolved government of as the p. 4. proletariat.” dictatorship in created which have been “Under the circumstances advanced, in the most especially world, the whole capitalist and freest enlightened most most powerful, col- imperialism oppression countries militarist — imperialist nations, weaker universal onies and admit the idea of ‘peace’ of Versailles —to slaughter, a the capitalists to the will of voluntary submission of majority exploited, peaceful, of a reformist passage Socialism, only give proof is not ex- but it petty bourgeois stupidity, decep- treme is a direct disguisal workmen, capitalist wage-slavery, tion of the a This truth that the bour- concealment of the truth. geoisie, enlightened portion the most and democratic at bourgeoisie, stopping is even now not deceit and at slaughter peas- of millions of workmen and crime, right ants, private ownership order to retain the over the means production. Only a violent defeat of the bourgeoisie, the confiscation of its the annihila- property, bourgeois tion of governmental apparatus, the entire parliamentary, military, bureaucratic, judicial, adminis- trative, municipal, etc., even the individual exile or in- ternment dangerous of the most stubborn and exploiters, the establishment of a strict control over them for the repression of all attempts inevitable at resistance and capitalist slavery only restoration of such measures will — guarantee be able to the complete submission of the whole exploiters.” class of p. 11.
“That which victory before the of the proletariat seems but a theoretical opinion difference of on question ‘democracy,’ inevitably becomes on the morrow victory, question only which can be decided by force of p. arms.”
“For all countries, even most ‘legal’ free and ‘peacе- ful’ ones the sense of a lesser acuteness the class struggle, period arrived, has when it has become ab- solutely necessary for every party join Communist systematically lawful and unlawful work, lawful and un- organization.” lawful p. 18. work necessary carry on unlawful especially “It as, imperialist after the navy, police, army, in the becoming are the world governments
slaughter, all the open peasants to all armies, the national afraid of setting all kinds secret they up workingmen, and the bour- organizations recruited from military of select geoisie *67 improved technical provided especially and p. 19. equipment.” in struggle every country Europe
“The class almost entering the war. phase is civil Under and America in can have no confidence such conditions the Communists everywhere create a bourgeois They parallel laws. should moment illegal which at the decisive should apparatus, every way in duty by party, possible the do its assist country In in every where, consequence revolution. the exceptional laws, martial law or of other the Commu- lawfully, on their work a combina- carry nists are unable necessary.” work is absolutely of lawful and unlawful tion p. 28. propaganda agitation
“A persistent systematic necessary army, groups in the where Communist should organization. every military Wherever, in be formed agitation repressive owing impos- becomes legislation, carry agitation on sible, necessary illegally. it is such carry participate But refusal to on or such work should to the equal to treason revolutionary cause, be considered incompatible with affiliation with Third Interna- the p. tional.” 28. affiliating desirous of party
“Each with the Communist obliged be International should render every possible Republics struggle against their assistance Soviet counter-revolutionary forces. The all Communist parties carry precise on a and definite propaganda should to in- transport the workers to refuse to any duce kind of mili- for fighting against intended tary equipment the Soviet by legal illegal and should also Republics, means carry amongst the propaganda troops against on a sent the p. republics, etc.” workers’ proletariat
“The world is confronted with bat- decisive living epoch an of civil war. tles. We are The criti- In cal hour struck. almost all has countries where there class, working the any importance is a labor movement of and decisive hand, arms midst fierce stands the working class in battles. Now need of a more than ever strong losing organization. Without hour on inde- working time, keep invaluable must class struggle.” fatigably impending for the decisive preparing p. 33. power government
“Until time will when until the finally have been conquered proletariat, firmly will es- proletarian time when the rule have been restora- beyond bourgeois possibility tablished organized Party will in its tion, the Communist have Up to the time only minority of the workers. ranks during it, and will have been seized power when the may, under period, transition the Communist po- moral and undisputed exercise conditions, favorable litical semi-prole- proletarian influence on all but it will not population; classes of the able tarian Only within ranks. when the dictator- them its to unite deprived bourgeoisie of such of the workers has ship weapons press, school, *68 powerful parliament, government apparatus, etc.; only when the church, the capitalist of the order will have become final overthrow only will all then all or almost thе an evident fact — Party.” the the pp. workers enter ranks of Communist 33-34. the over working victory the
“The class cannot achieve alone, and general bourgeoisie by of the strike means must resort proletariat of arms. The policy the folded p. to an armed uprising.” begin
“As soon as Communism comes light, it must present the character of the epoch (the to elucidate minations of self-destruction, uninterrupted cul- capitalism, imperialistic self-negation and
growth war, etc.). of civil political may and relationships groupings Political be of countries, different but different the essence the everywhere we is the same: must start the matter for preparation proletarian uprising, a politically direct technically, bourgeoisie for the destruction of the poletarian of the new the creation state. for the way at can no serve as arena present “Parliament work- reform, for for the lot of the struggle improving of a '201 ing people, as it has at periods preceding certain the of epoch. The centre of gravity political present life at has been completely finally beyond the transferred only limits of parliament. owing hand, On the other to its relationship to working masses, the but also complicated mutual groups relations within the various bourgeois the to have itself, bourgeoisie the is forced through some of policies way its or another passed one parliament, cliques power, haggle where the various betray get exhibit strong ones, their their weak sides and themselves etc. it is im- unmasked, etc., Therefore the mediate task to tear this working historical class apparatus classes, the to break ruling out of hands of the place proletarian and to in its new destroy it, create a time, however, At the the revolution- apparatus. same concerned ary general in working vitally class staff in- scouting parliamentary having parties its the in order to facilitate this bourgeoisie, stitutions of the 44-45. pp. task destruction.” gov- proletarian form cannot be a “Parliamentarism dic- during period ernment between transition proletariat. bourgeoisie and that tatorship of struggle turns class At the moment when the accentuated form its inevitably must war, proletariat into civil which can- organization, fighting as a organization State ruling the former any representatives not contain will’ harmful ‘national classes; all fictions of of division parliamentary time, proletariat at only form injurious it; authority needless and Republic of Soviets. dictatorship is a proletarian one of which constitute bourgeois parliaments, “The machinery of of the State important apparatus the most proletariat over cannot won bourgeoisie, in general. order bourgeois than can the any more whole blowing up consists proletariat task *69 it, and all destroying bourgeoisie, of the machinery they be with whether it, institutions parliamentary 45-46. pp. constitutional-monarchical.” republican or repudiates parliamentar- “Consequently, Communism the same as a it renounces future; of the ism as the form re- it dictatorship proletariat; of the class form of the winning over the parliaments; pudiates possibility it is Therefore destroy parliamentarism. aim to its is or- bourgeois State utilizing only speak possible The object destroying them. ganizations a exclusively be discussed on such only and question can plane. it struggle, because struggle political
“All a clаss Any strike, spreads when finally struggle power. a bourgeois menace to the through the whole is a country, a character. To strive State, acquires political and thus destroy State, its bourgeoisie, to overthrow the warfare. To create own carry political means to on one’s bridling and of the apparatus suppression class —for may resisting bourgeoisie, apparatus whatever such an gain power.” p. 46. political be—means to struggle system “The whole of developing mass means a growing form, more acute in demonstrations ever leading logically uprising against capitalist to an or- government. der of In this warfare masses de- veloping war, guiding into a civil party prole- general must, rule, tariat as a secure every and all lawful positions, making them its auxiliaries the revolutionary subordinating positions work, such plans general that of campaign, struggle.” the mass p. 47.
“On hand, the other acknowledgement of the value parliamentary work no wise leads to an absolute, in-all-and-any-case acknowledgement of the necessity of concrete elections and a concrete participation in parlia- mentary sessions. The matter depends upon a series specific conditions. Under certain circumstances it may necessary become to leave parliament. Bolsheviks did they so when left the pre-parliament order to break it up, to it, weaken and to set up against it Petrograd Soviet, which was then prepared to head they uprising; acted way the same in the Constit- uent Assembly day on the of its dissolution, converting the Third Congress of Soviets into the centre of political In events. other circumstances a boycotting of the elec- may tions necessary, direct, violent storming of .both, great bourgeois State apparatus and the parlia- mentary bourgeois clique, a participation in the elec- tions with boycott of the parliament itself, etc. *70 the rule general a recognizing “In this while way, central election the participating of necessity self-government, local of institutions and the parliament, the Communist institutions, the work such as well as according to concretely, question the Party must decide Boycotting given the moment. of specific the conditions the leaving parliament, parliament, or the elections or the im- a of possibility there is chiefly when permissible, is mediate transition to an 49. fight power.” p. for armed Com- the Central delegate, “A decision Communist unlawful with lawful work is bound to combine mittee, en- delegate Communist In countries where the work. by way be utilized this must joys inviolability, certain a the for illegal organizations to rendering assistance p. 51. party.” of the propaganda legislature] must the member “Each Communist [of to who is bound legislator’ not a remember that he is agitator but an legislators, the other agreements with seek camp in order to Party, enemy’s into the of the carry detailed there. The Party of the Communist out orders the wide mass his constit- member answerable law- Communist uents, but his own —whether p. ful or unlawful.” Inde- leaders of the propaganda right “The others), Kautsky, and pendents (Hilferding, proving bourgeois 'system’ Soviet with the compatibility of the Assembly, complete is either a misunder- Constituent development standing proletarian the laws deceiving working or of the revolution, a conscious class. dictatorship proletariat. of the The Soviets are Assembly dictatorship bour- Constituent geoisie. To reconcilе dictatorship unite and working bourgeoisie class that of the is impossible.” with p. 64. victory proletariat
“After the towns, this peasants landed will inevitably op- class [the farmers] all from sabotage open pose means, armed coun- ter-revolutionary resistance. The revolutionary proletar- must, therefore, immediately begin iat prepare necessary every force the disarmament of single man class, together of this the overthrow capi- relentless, talists crushing proletariat must deal industry,
blow to class. To that end it must arm *71 proletariat organize rural and the with country, Soviets room no for and exploiters, preponderant place a must be reserved to the the proletarians semi-proletarians.” and p. 80.
“The im- revolutionary proletariat to an proceed must mediate of and unconditional confiscation of the estates big the landowners and can be admitted in the landlords ... propaganda No parties
ranks of the Communist in favor indemnity of an to be paid large the owners of estates for their expropriation.” p. 82.
Excerpts from Exhibit 8 — The State and Revolution, by Lenin (see note 13, supra): “We have already said above and show shall more fully at stage a later the En- teaching of Marx and gels regarding the inevitability of a violent revolution capitalist refers to the State. It replaced by cannot be proletarian the (the State dictatorship proletariat) of the through ‘withering mere away/ but, in with accordance general the rule, only can brought by about a violent hymn revolution. The sung its and Engels honor fully corresponding to the repeated declarations Marx of (see concluding the passages of the of Poverty Philosophy and the Communist Manifesto, open its proud and the inevitability declaration of revolution; of a violent also Program which, Marx’s Criticism of the Gotha thirty years after, mercilessly castigates he opportu- its ‘im- character) by no praise nist is means mere —this pulse/ declamation, sally. a mere or a mere polemical fostering necessity systematically the among rev- only point masses this of view about violent this olution at the root of the whole Marx’s En- lies just gels’ teaching, neglect and it is the such propa- ganda agitation present predominant both the brings and the Kautskian Social-Chauvinists schools betrayal prominent their of it into relief. the proletarian capitalist
“The for substitution impossible revolution, without violent while State proletarian State, is, of all States, abolition of ” ‘withering away.’ pp. possible through 15-16. only force; organization “The particular State is a form of of hold- organization purpose is the for the violence which ing prole- down What class some class. is the be, naturally, only; tariat can must hold down? It need bourgeoisie. i. The toilers exploiting class, e., exploit- of the only the State overcome resistance suppression guide can ers, only proletariat and bring class proletariat, only it to fulfilment —the can unite class revolutionary finish, only against struggle in the exploited all the toilers and the from displacement complete capitalist class its power.” 17-18. pp.
“The doctrine of the applied by class-war, Marx to revolution, question of the State of the Socialist inevitably recognition leads political suprem- proletariat, acy dictatorship, e., its i. an au- thority upon shared with none relying directly else and *72 the armed force of the masses. The ovеrthrow of the of capitalist only by class feasible the transformation in- proletariat ruling class, the evitable into the able to crush the desperate and bourgeoisie, and resistance of the all for new organize, order, the settlement of economic toiling and exploited the masses. the or- proletariat State,
“The needs the centralized of ganization violence, both for purpose of force and the peasantry, guiding great population mass of the the —the semi-proletariat middle-class, the the work the lower —in pp. 18-19. of reconstruction.” economic Socialist particular State, if a “But, the needs the as proletariat class, against the capitalist of force organization form of us: upon spontaneously forces itself question almost organization can be created an thinkable such Is it breaking and destruction up a preliminary without own use created its machinery government leads Manifesto Communist capitalist class? The conclusion is of this conclusion, this and it straight us of the summing results up practical Marx wrote 1851.” and gained between experience revolutionary p. 19. revolution, England, where a Marx excluded “Hence imagined and was could be revolution, people’s even of the condition the preliminary without possible, then ready machinery destruction the available 'of State.’ great 1917, imperial- in the the first
“Today, epoch unreal, and war, distinction of Marx’s becomes ist last England America, greatest representa- and Anglo-Saxon 'liberty,’ in the sense of the absence tives of today bureaucracy, completely militarism and have military- dirty, bloody rolled down into the morass Europe, common to bureaucratic institutions dinating all subor- Today, England all to themselves. both else America, 'preliminary any and in condition of real people’s break-up, shattering revolution’ is the of the machinery 'available ready (perfected State’ those up countries between 1914 to the ‘Euro- pean’ general standard).” imperialist p. 26. “But capitalist from this democracy inevitably nar- —
row, stealthily thrusting the poor, aside therefore its core, hypocritical and treacherous^-progress does not along march simple, 'greater smooth direct path greater democracy,’ the Liberal professors as and the lower middle Opportunists class would us have believe. No, progressive development is, towards Commun- —that through ism—marches and the dictatorship of the proletariat; otherwise,
cannot do for there is no one else who can break the resistance of the exploiting capitalists, and no way doing other it. “And the dictatorship proletariat is, —that organization advance-guard oppressed ruling class, for the purpose of crushing the oppres- produce
sors—cannot merely expansion of democracy. Together with an expansion immense of democracy —for *73 the first becoming time democracy for the poor, democracy for the people, and not democracy for the rich folk—the of dictatorship proletariat will produce a series of restrictions of liberty in the case of the oppressors, ex- ploiters, capitalists. We must crush them in order to free humanity from wage-slavery; their resistance must be broken by force. It is clear that where sup- there pression there must also be violence, and there cannot liberty or democracy. “Engels expressed this splendidly in letter his to Bebel
when he said, as the reader will remember, that ‘the pro- but liberty, of the interests State, not needs the letariat when one crushing opponents; its and, of purpose for the ceased will have freedom, State speak be able to will to exist.’ nation, of the majority the vast “Democracy for from democ- is, the exclusion by force —that
suppression of the nation: exploiters oppressors racy the—of during democracy which we shall see is the modification pp. to Communism.” Capitalism from the transition 63-64. to Com- during Capitalism the transition from
“Again, but this case munism, suppression necessary; is still minority suppression exploiters is the instrument, A majority exploited. special special is, necessary, suppression machine for ‘State’ —is —that State, longer but this is now a transitional no a State ordinary suppression of the term. For the sense minority exploiters by majority who those wage yesterday slaves, comparatively were is a matter but easy, that it will blood- simple so and natural cost far less than suppression risings slaves, shed wage laborers, serfs or and will cost the human race far pp. less.” 64-65.
Mr. Justice Jackson:
I do not participate in this decision. This case was instituted June of tried 1939 and December In year. January 1940, I became Attorney General of States and responsibility succeeded to official it. for U. iii. S. This I have considered a cause I disqualification, and desire the reason be a matter of record. Notes set forth excerpts The bombastic relies, particularly the Government clusive, upon which say charge. do not We support lend considerable found, not have possibly that a reasonable man could in 1927 Party district court that the Communist did, by force actively urged the overthrow of the Government But not the issue here. We are and violence.40 that is question not concerned with the whether reasonable man might conclude, narrow ad- so nor with the issue whether capitalism machinery of the State take hold workers must destroy it.” book, had had not read this but he Petitioner testified Party. widely been circulated specify upon its what evidence court did not the district Since remaining docu findings to mention the conclusory rested, it is well evidence were introduced into published 1927 which ments before record, upon but into excerpts read from which were respect issue specifically rely with does Government Wing Lenin, documents Left Com Those are: force and violence. English 1920; Pre- munism, published in about Bucharin and first Communism, published obraschensky, written 1919 and ABC of (petitioner testified that this was never country 1921 in this around expelled accepted its authors were later from work and that Youth, periodical published 1925; International); International of America, Party pub- The 4th National Convention of the Workers Party 1925; fished The Year of Workers in America Second Program (1924); and, and Constitution the Workers exception With the last America, circulated around 1924. these documents, excerpts publi into the record from two read these nothing exceptional cations on the issue of force and violence. contain
Notes
notes distin illegally, as a certificate like. But tion or the when it is obtained fraudulently, procured guished from precedent with a “condition compliance without naturaliza grant petition authority Court States, 17, 22. Maney v. 278 U. S. tion.” later under earlier and question, the Act Under precedent conditions numerous Congress prescribed Acts,1