I come then to section 9, 10, and 11 of the bill, which are a revival of the earlier bills proposed and passed by one or the other of the Houses of Congress, generally known as military disaffection bills. We recognize that that is-I will put it this way: We recognize that that there may be a need for legislation which will prevent civilians from doing what the soldier is not permitted to do, namely, to stir up mutiny. We do not believe that there is any background for such action at the present time so as to require a bill as broad as the one here drawn, and we also have grave misgivings about the interpretation and administration of any such bill.

In other words, if there were some reasonable likelihood that the bill would be used only against evils such as direct incitement to disobedience, it would probably be unobjectionable. But we know, from past experience, that unless a bill is more carefully drawn than it is at the present time, it will not be so limited and it will be used to cover all sorts of literature, which is not intended, really, to induce persons in the military forces to disobey orders, but which some judicial body, in some kind of excitement, may think possibly might have that result. There has been all too much in the law of this country of the punishment of people because of dangerous tendencies; and therefore, I respectfully suggest that this portion of the bill be given further study, with the view of clearly limiting it to the evils against which it is directed.

That might be accomplished by the insertion of the word "direct," or some other way. I do not consider myself to be competent to advise on the drafting of statutes, at least not in this brief discussion. I merely throw this out as something for further consideration.

Now, title III, beginning with section 12, has many things in it which seem questionable. Title III is aimed at the alien. The alien appears to be very unpopular at the present time, and much legislation has been proposed and some, indeed, already passed by this House, which would restrict the rights of aliens. We believe that the aliens lawfully in this country should have the same rights of expression as the citizens; that as soon as you begin to restrict the freedom of aliens, you have introduced a wedge which will, sooner or later, restrict the freedom of citizens.

The first provision here, section 12, prevents naturalization of an alien

who believes in any form of government for the United States contrary to that now existing in the United States or who is a member of, or affiliated with, any organization which advocates any form of government for the United States contrary to that now existing in the United States.

Now, surely, we all have a right to advocate changes in the form of Government, and while the alien, who is here, enjoying our hospitality, should not, in conformity with the canons of good taste, partake in political discussions, nevertheless his right to partake in discussion and the right to join organizations that want to change the law, or even the structure of the Government, should not be taken away from him. There was a time, not so long past, when aliens were permitted to vote in many States. There is nothing in the Constitution of the United States which prevents an alien from voting. And the time may come again when States will permit aliens, resident within their borders, to vote. This body should not deprive an alien, otherwise an estimable person, of the right to citizenship, because of the belief

that he holds to begin with-because he holds beliefs which are perfectly lawful. There is nothing in this proposal which limits the character of belief to unlawful matters.

And so we are opposed to this proposed section 12 as hostile to all the conditions of American life.

Now, section 13 raises other questions. It seeks to deprive persons in, presumably, Canada and Mexico, of the right to work in the United States, if they live in those countries. I understand there is a representative here from the Secretary of State in opposition to this provision, presumably on the ground that it conflicts with treaties. Whether or not it conflicts with treaties, we submit that it conflicts with American notions of fair play.

We have, in recent years, much restricted immigration into this country, for reasons or policies which many of us believe to be sound, but which others think unwise, economically, and that they are inhumane and cruel.

I think I am not breaking any confidence when I say that Mr. Justice Brandeis is of the opinion that the stoppage of immigration into this country in recent years has been a great economic error; that this country can use the skill and brains and work of all the people who possess the ability to work; that we do not solve our economic problems by shutting our doors. This is a step in a direction which we think to be a wrong one, and we hope it will not be enacted into law.

Now, section 12 requires the deportation of certain classes of people. It adds, I believe, three new subdivisions, Nos. 6, 7, and 8. I quote No. 6:

Any alien engaged in espionage for a foreign government or international political agency seeking to change the character of the Government of the United States, or influence its policies.

There may be a need for the deportation of agents of foreign governments engaged in improper activities, but surely this broad language would require the deportation of aliens engaged in the most harmless kind of publicity for their countries, and would open the door to all kinds of persecution, because, gentlemen, you must not forget that every time a law like this proposed is enacted or any of these restrictive laws, the lives of thousands of innocent persons are harmed, if not sometimes ruined, because of accusations which are brought against them and proceedings taken against them. That is particularly true in the field of deportation where the aliens' rights are so meager that he has no right to court review on the facts, and seldom has an opportunity to consult counsel, if taken away from his home on a warrant issued after the hearing, before he has any opportunity to get a legal test of the proceeding; and particularly, therefore, in this field should care be exercised, so that the doors do not open wide to a repetition of the notorious Palmer raids of the twenties.

That applies also to subdivision 7, which is a very remarkable provision:

Any alien who is a member of any association, society, or group which advocates, teaches, or advises a change in the form of Government of the United States, or engages in any way in domestic political agitation.

Such person is going to be deported. I do not know, from the way this is written, whether it is intended that the alien who is engaged

142240-39-ser. 3- -2

in political discussion is to be deported, or the member of the organi-. zation which engages in such discussion. That is a question, either way. I just imagine that it means any alien who expresses, on a street corner or in a saloon, or in his home, any views about any political matter of any kind and God knows what is not political today is going to be subjected to deportation, or at least an inquisition Just imagine what that is going to mean, the discontent that it is going to arouse, the injustice that is going to result.

Now, we have subdivision 8, that requires the deportation of any alien who has not become a citizen. I will not speak on that subdivision because it does not come directly within the purpose of the organization for which I am appearing here, although I may say that we are generally opposed to unreasonable restriction on aliens. I think there are others here who will speak on that, and I will pass on to other things.

Section 15, and following, of this title, deal with registration, and requires registration, and so forth. There may be some occasion for the requirement of registration of aliens, although I think that need is much exaggerated, and the improper consequences may be great. I can see no need for the requirement that every alien is required to register, and be subjected to inqusition, as this law provides, every 6 months. That is a form of governmental control on freedom of movement of individuals, which we have always deplored and which we have never heretofore engaged in. I hope we do not begin with this.

Now, we come to title IV. The first two sections of title IV requires

no comment.

Section 25 is a very peculiar section, and it requires the cancelation of all quotas, if any foreign government should refuse to admit a single person ordered deported. As I have said, our legislation on the subject of quotas is open to much criticism, particularly in the present state of the world's affairs. But to deny those appeals from those unfortunates abroad, who seek this country as their haven, as, for a centruy and a half, thousands and thousands, fleeing from oppression throughout the world, have come here-now, because a tyrannical government abroad for one reason or another, or even a good government, for one reason or another, refuses to receive back some person ordered from this country, because of a heinous crime, would be a most outrageous consequence, and I trust that section of this law or proposed law will be given further consideration.

Now, title V, the last title, has two new provisions. One of them compels the detention of any person who cannot be deported within a certain time, indefinitely, unless the Secretary of Labor should decree otherwise, with no measure of court review of more than a very limited character. The court review provided is a direct appeal to the appropriate circuit court of appeals. There is much to besaid for that proceeding as avoiding an unnecessary step in the district court, but it is an unusual provision. The decision of such circuit court of appeals shall be final, thus precluding all possibility of review by the Supreme Court of the United States. Now, appeal to the Supreme Court is limited enough under the present law. That Court can refuse to receive any case of this character, if it so desires, but to deprive it of all power to review would be a restriction on liberty because, after all, our courts, so long as they function properly,

are or may be the guardians of our liberties, and of all the courts of which that should be true, and in recent years has been true, the Supreme Court is such. No provision of law should be countenanced which would deprive that Court of the right to review the decisions of inferior tribunals in appropriate cases.

On the other aspect of this portion of the law, namely, that providing for the detention of persons not deportable, because the countries from which they came would not take them back, there, again, I think is a serious encroachment upon liberty. If a person has committed a crime, he is punished for that crime. When he has served that punishment, he should not be subjected to further punishment, because that, in effect, is what this bill purports to do. The fact that it is not to be at hard labor is a mitigating circumstance, which I suppose is some benefit, but freedom is the essential thing, the freedom to work and live and love, and a person who has served his time, should not be perpetually kept in jail because he is an alien, and only because he is an alien.

Now, I have not argued the constitutional points, but I think this bill bristles with them. If you gentlemen wish, I will be glad to submit a brief on those points.

Mr. HOBBS. We will be glad to have you do so. There is one question I would like to ask you: Whether or not your organization advocates the extension of citizenship rights to aliens? You seem to express the hope that that might be done.

Mr. FRAENKEL. No, no; I do not advocate that. That is a matter that the States should have complete freedom of decision on. merely mentioned that in passing as one of the reasons why, in view of the fact that the Constitution has not confided Congress with the power of determining the qualification for voting, it would be unwise for Congress to deprive aliens of the right to engage in political discussion. That was all. Now, my organization takes no stand on that subject and has not given it any consideration.

Mr. HOBBS. We thank you, sir. We may continue for a while and we will be glad to hear anybody else who desires to be heard.

STATEMENT OF JOHN THOMAS TAYLOR, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, THE AMERICAN LEGION

Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the American Legion favors the enactment of proposals such as are contained in H. R. 5138. As you perhaps know, one of our major activities has been our Americanism program and under this we have repeatedly requested the Congress to enact legislation pertaining to the deportation of undesirable aliens, the registration and fingerprinting of aliens; and we have urged the deportation of those aliens within our midst who urge the overthrow of the United States Government by force, fraud, or violence or seek to promote race or religious prejudice. We believe H. R. 5138 is a long step in the right direction and hope the Congress will speedily enact it into law.

Inasmuch as the majority of our Americanism resolutions, which are pertinent to H. R. 5138, are self-explanatory, I ask permission that they be inserted in the record as follows:

Be it resolved by the American Legion in this its National Convention in Los Angeles, Calif. (1938), That we reaffirm our bitter opposition to communism,

fascism, naziism, and any or all like forces and organizations that seek to destroy our form of government; and be it

Resolved, That we condemn all organizations and demand the expulsion from our country of all aliens who promote loyalty to some other government; and be it further

Resolved, That we urge national legislation that will punish American citizens who advocate the overthrow of our Government by force, fraud, or violence or seek to promote race or religious prejudice, and deport all aliens who do likewise

COMBAT MORE FORCIBLY ALL UN-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA

Be it resolved, That the American Legion in national convention in the city of Los Angeles firmly condemns all doctrines and influences prejudicial to our present democratic form of government and pledges us to combat more forcibly all unAmerican propaganda, activities, and influences; and

Be it further resolved, That the creditable work of the National Americanism Commission and the department Americanism committees be augmented in order that the American public as well as the Legion be more fully aware by reports, education, and otherwise of the increasing dangers to our form of government.

FINGERPRINTING AND REGISTRATION

Be it resolved by the Twentieth National Convention of the American Legion, assembled in Los Angeles, Calif., That we hereby reaffirm the stand taken at our previous national convention wherein it was urged that legislation be passed and machinery established to fingerprint and register all persons in the United States.

DEPORTATION OF ALIENS

Resolved, That steps be taken to the end that the immigration laws be so revised as to require that any alien who at any time shall be convicted of a felony in any court in the United States shall be immediately deported.

INVESTIGATION OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH EXISTING IMMIGRATION LAWS

Whereas certain officials of the Department of Labor have failed miserably in enforcement of the laws relative to immigration and deportation; and

Whereas said officials of the Department of Labor have consistently blocked the passage of new and much needed laws to regulate immigration and deportation; Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the American Legion in national convention at Los Angeles demands that the Congress of the United States investigate the failure of these officials to comply with the existing immigration laws and take such steps as may be necessary to correct this unwarranted failure of duty.

REFUSAL OF UNDESIRABLES WHEN DEPORTED FROM UNITED STATES

Be it resolved by the American Legion in national convention assembled, That the immigration laws of the United States be amended to provide that admission to the United States be denied the nationals of any country which refuses to accept the undesirables of that nation, when deported from the United States.

TOTALLY RESTRICT IMMIGRATION FOR PERIOD OF YEARS

Be it resolved, That the American Legion in national convention assembled instruct the national legislative committee of the American Legion to urge upon the Congress of the United States, the passage of a law which would totally restrict immigration on all our borders for a period of at least 10 years, or until such time as we, in this country, can take up the slack and find jobs for the unemployed citizens of the United States.

REAFFIRM FAITH IN UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

Resolved, That we do reaffirm our faith in the wise safeguards provided in the Constitution of the United States, and do call upon our fellow citizens to resist all attempts to create hatreds between the various law-abiding components of our population, to the end and purpose that we shall continue to live together in peace and harmony.