Word: clear
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1940-1949
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...would investigate people's political, social, sexual, or religious attitudes and values owes a duty to the privacy and dignity of the people he questions. That duty is to warn the justifiably apprehensive respondent of the use to be made of the information procured. This duty is notably clear where the poll is termed "anonymous," and the individual polled is thereby lulled into what may be a false sense of security...
...clear that such things as the Marshall Plan have been extremely useful in carrying out our political policy of stopping the growth of Communism; but it is likewise clear that we must prepare more definite military defenses, as well as political ones, if we are to maintain ourselves as a prosperous democracy...
...loyalty oath was issued in order to punish and prevent unorthodox political thinking and opinion, and not to prevent subversive action, is clear when we examine the Federal acts in force at the time of the adoption of the order. There existed at that time, and still exist, statutes punishing sabatoge, 50 USC 104-6; espionage, 50 USC 31-2; treason, 18 USC 1-3; sedition, 18 USC 10; and in addition, conspiracy to commit any of the above was punished under 18 USC 88. Also, Federal Civil Service employees are liable for discharge "for such cause as will promote...
Freedom of speech and press, and a fortiori, of thought and opinion, are guaranteed to all Americans by the First Amendment. The only limitation placed upon this freedom is the "clear and present danger" doctrine first enunciated by Justice Holmes in Shenck v. U. S., 249 Us 47 (1919). It is important to note that this doctrine applies when freedom of speech is abused to the point of a person screaming "fire" in a crowded theatre when he knows that no danger of fire exists. It is quite a different matter to apply this limiting doctrine to the realm...
That proceedings before the Loyalty Board violate most of these safeguards is clear. The Attorney General may arbitrarily place organization on his list and is not required by law to give any reasons for his action; the organization has no right to a hearing; individuals accused of "disloyalty" are not tried by a jury, have no right to counsel, are not clearly informed of the charges against them; the loyalty order is ex post facto in effect, and there is no right to examine witnesses or evidence used against the accused. This is the type of un-American proceeding which...