Supreme Court and President
The ruling of the Supreme Court on President Truman's action in seizing the steel industry in order to prevent a strike which would gravely impede armament production is itself in some respects complicated and creates a complicated situa- tion. The verdict, declaring the President's, action unconstitu- tional, implies no condemnation of the action in itself. It would have been perfectly in order if taken by Congress, as it still may be, but for the President to take it on his own responsi- bility was to exceed the powers granted to him under the constitution. But that view was only held by six of the nine justices of the Supreme Court, and the minority included Chief Justice Vinson. Moreover, one or two of the majority justices seem to consider that in certain emergencies the President would be justified in acting as he did, but that this was not sufficient emergency to warrant that. On a dispassionate view there is no cause for the President to stand in a white sheet, but dispassionate views are not common within five months of a Presidential election, and the Republicans can be counted on to make all the political capital they can out of Mr. Truman's discomfiture. That matters much less than the steps to be taken now to remedy a grave situation. The deferred strike broke out the moment the Court's verdict had been given, and the prospect of a steel shortage is already affecting the mines which supply the coal to smelt the steel and the railways which are extensive steel-users. The obvious course would be for the President to invite Congress to pass legislation on the lines of his now invalidated proclamation. But it is far from certain that Congress in its present mood would agree.
Previous page
