Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

SUGGESTED STATEMENT FROM DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RESPECTING ITS

INTENDED ACTIONS

Senator MCCLELLAN. Now do you think maybe the Board could do a lot of good if it was used?

Mr. MAHAN. That is correct.

Senator MCCLELLAN. That is what you say?

Mr. MAHAN. Yes.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Let me ask you this. The House has gone along with the matter and I have supported this in the past. Mr. MAHAN. I know you have.

Senator MCCLELLAN. I don't know what effort will be made now, what opposition will appear in the Senate against this item. I am trying to give you the opportunity to make a case if you have one for continuing your appropriation.

I wonder what we can get from the Justice Department on this? Mr. Clerk, do you have anything from the Justice Department? The CLERK. No.

CHAIRMAN'S LETTER TO ATTORNEY GENERAL AND REPLY

Senator MCCLELLAN. I think we should find out. I will request the Attorney General to file a letter or statement for this committee advising what action the Justice Department is going to take. I will insert my letter and his reply, when received, at this point in the record. (The letters follow:)

June 26, 1970

The Honorable John N. Mitchell

Attorney General of the United States

Department of Justice

Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

I am enclosing for your consideration a copy of the transcript of testimony at the subcommittee hearing on the 1971 fund requirements for the Subversive Activities Control Board. The House bill allowed the full budget estimate of $401,400 for operating expenses of the Board for the ensuing fiscal year.

As you perhaps know, the case load of this activity is al at the present time; in fact, no organization cases have been referred to the Board since 1965.

In light of this condition, I request that you submit a statement setting forth the Department's views as to the probable certification or assignment of cases to this Board within the next fiscal year.

appreciate a prompt reply.

Sincerely yours,

(༩༨)

John L. McClellan

I shall

Chairman, Subcommittee on the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies

Enclosure

Office of the Attorney General
Washington, D. C.

July 1, 1970

The Honorable John L. McClellan
Chairman

Subcommittee on the Departments

of State, Justice, and Commerce, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies United States Senate

Washington, D. C. 20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Thank you for your letter of June 26, enclosing a transcript of Chairman Mahan's testimony before your Subcommittee respecting the appropriation for the Subversive Activities Control Board for fiscal 1971. I do, of course, know that the Board's activities have been seriously crippled by the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in the Boorda case, and that its case load is presently, as you say, "minimal". However, I am happy to take this opportunity to advise you that the Department of Justice anticipates that it will file, within the next couple of weeks, at least two petitions with the Board requesting that organizations be designated as "communist-front" within the meaning of the Internal Security Act of 1950. Assistant Attorney General J. Walter Yeagley would be happy, at your convenience, to discuss with you further details of these proposed petitions, and other potential activities of the Board during fiscal 1971.

[blocks in formation]

PENDING HOUSE BILL AUTHORIZING LIMITATION OF CASES BY

STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL

I understand the Board can only act if a case is certified to you by the Attorney General.

Mr. MAHAN. That is right.

Senator MCCLELLAN. If he is not going to certify any cases, you cannot justify this request for funds no matter how much good you think the Board could do.

Mr. MAHAN. I understand.

Senator MCCLELLAN. We cannot justify the appropriation.

Mr. MAHAN. There was a bill introduced in the House today, Senator. You know our workload did did not stop until April 20 so we really have not had much time to correct the situation or to put the Board in a position better than we are today because of the time situation.

But a bill was introduced in the House today by Representative Ashbrook, the ranking Republican member of the Internal Security Committee which would authorize the attorney general of a State or a commonwealth to have the same power to initiate cases before the Subversive Activties Control Board as the Attorney General of the United States. I don't know whether it will pass or not.

Senator MCCLELLAN. I don't know if I would favor that. I think it ought to be screened through the Attorney General maybe. That is my immediate reaction.

Mr. MAHAN. People are thinking about it.

Senator MCCLELLAN. I think there is enough work to justify this Board.

Mr. MAHAN. I do, too, Senator.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Í think that maybe the functions of the Board are needed but there is something lacking here. There is some defect or deficiency or something needed that is not present here to get this Board really activated and at work.

Mr. MAHAN. That is right, Senator.

REVIEW OF TESTIMONY BY AND STATEMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE RE ANTICIPATED

CERTIFICATION

Senator MCCLELLAN. I don't know just what it is.

I think, Mr. Clerk, we should contact the Justice Department and let them review this testimony here this afternoon, and I should like to have a statement from them as to what they anticipate will be the probable certification or assignment to the cases of this Board within the next fiscal year.

Mr. MAHAN. I think, Senator, what you did in 1967 was helpful. I think you should have the Attorney General and the Chairman of this Board report to Congress on July 31 of each year.

Senator MCCLELLAN. That is a requirement you can make that is needed, but the first thing I want to know is when you get this up in committee or on the floor and someone raises a question of the workload, well what is the workload? What will you be doing? Who knows?

Mr. MAHAN. The Attorney General should tell you.

Senator MCCLELLAN. I think we should clear this up. We should be able to establish your expected workload for the record here before the appropriation is made. There are two sources from which to establish that, and that is you, the Board, and primarily the Department of Justice.

Mr. MAHAN. That is correct.

(The statement follows:)

CERTIFICATION AUTHORITY

Senator MCCLELLAN. Your Board cannot take any action unless there is a certification to you by the Attorney General.

Mr. MAHAN. That is why I think the Senate had a bill, Senate bill 12, which gave the Administrator or the Chairman of the Board the coextensive power of the Attorney General to file cases.

Senator MCCLELLAN. But now you don't have it?

Mr. MAHAN. No. Today the Attorney General is the only one who can do so. The only thing I can go on, Senator, is I was a lawyer for a long time in a small town and there were 15 or 20 crimes committed in the town. The judge that presided in the local court would have to assume that sooner or later he would get a case.

Senator MCCLELLAN. That would be true but this is a little different. In the case of the judge you mention, a grand jury could act or some other process could be employed or evoked to bring a case to the judge but here you have only one source.

Mr. MAHAN. That is correct, sir.

Senator MCCLELLAN. And that source should be placed on record here as to whether it is anticipated that you will have cases assigned to the Board or not.

Mr. MAHAN. I hope the Attorney General uses this and does a good job for the country. I appreciate all that you have done for us in the past and I want to compliment your staff, they have been so helpful. Senator MCCLELLAN. We have a good staff, we admit that.

SURVEILLANCE LOGS: PENDING LEGISLATION

Now you said you wanted counsel to say something. Very well,

you may.

Mr. WATERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Anything you want to add to what Mr. Mahan has said?

Mr. WATERS. I think Mr. Mahan has covered the facts very well. The Attorney General may have some concern about the fact that bringing cases before our Board might result in the disclosure of surveillance logs. This is the basis of the request for a continuance in the Du Bois case awaiting a decision in the Kolod case. Your measure would remedy these constraints.

Senator MCCLELLAN. That measure may never become law, you can't go on that. I hope it will but there is no way to be certain about it. Some parts of it may become law and other parts not.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »