SUBCOMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE INTERNAL SECURITY 85270 TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE EIGHTY-FOURTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION FOR THE YEAR 1956 SECTION XII DECEMBER 31, 1956 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1957 15 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY JAMES O. EASTLAND, Mississippi, Chairman ESTES KEFAUVER, Tennessee ALEXANDER WILEY, Wisconsin JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland SUBCOMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE INTERNAL SECURITY ACT AND OTHER INTERNAL SECURITY LAWS JAMES O. EASTLAND, Mississippi, Chairman OLIN D. JOHNSTON, South Carolina JOHN L. MCCLELLAN, Arkansas WILLIAM E. JENNER, Indiana HERMAN WELKER, Idaho JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland ROBERT MORRIS, Chief Counsel SECTION XII ADMINISTRATION OF INTERNAL SECURITY LAWS AND LOYALTY-SECURITY PROGRAMS OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL ACT In 1950, legislation entitled "The Subversive Activities Control Act," was enacted. It provided that any organization, which was determined by the Subversive Activities Control Board, upon presentation of petition and facts by the Attorney General, to fall into the category of either a Communist-action or a Communist-front organization, would be compelled to register with the Attorney General. Since the enactment of this law, the Department of Justice has presented to the Subversive Activities Control Board the case of the Communist Party, USA, for the determination by the Board as to whether this organization was in fact a Communist-action organization. After lengthy hearings, the Board did find that the Communist Party, USA, was in fact a Communist-action organization. After the Matusow recantation, the Supreme Court sent the CP-USA case back to the Board which, after striking all challenged testimony, reaffirmed its original finding. Final Supreme Court action is awaited with considerable interest, since this case represents the key to the presentation of future cases seeking to label subversive groups and organizations as Communist-action organizations. During the course of the past few years, some 21 petitions have been filed before the Subversive Activities Control Board to require the registration of various groups as Communist-front organizations. In most of these cases, either an order was returned requiring registration as a Communist-front organization, or the cases are still in the process of hearing before the Board, if not on the dockets of the appellate courts on motions for review. In some instances, the prosecution of these cases was dismissed by the Board on the petition of the Attorney General due to the determination that the organization proceeded against had been dissolved voluntarily. The Board also has been asked to determine whether two labor organizations are Communist infiltrated. Detailed analysis of the cases referred to above is contained in the reports of the Attorney General to the President and to the Congress with respect to the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, as amended. The prosecution of cases before the Subversive Activities Control Board has been, and continues to be, a powerful force against the Communist conspiracy in the United States, and orders of the Board requiring the registration of the organizations and/or members thereof should inevitably result in a progressive weakening of the Communist movement. During the first session of the 84th Congress, in June of 1955, a bill was introduced by the chairman of the Internal Security Subcon mittee to amend the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 to pro-l vide for the preliminary evaluation of derogatory information con cerning individuals seeking Government employment. This measure would provide a means by which an applicant for Government employment, who believes that he is barred by derogatory reports against him, could have these reports evaluated. Under this bill the evaluation would be undertaken by the Subversive Activities Control Board, and the process could be used by an applicant eithe for a Government job or for work with a Government contractor or for active military service. At present, contractors in Govern ment work will not employ persons on a job where security clear ance is required, if anything of a derogatory character appears the application for employment. Security clearance may be obtained now only if a person is employed. Thus, an employer, if he desire to use the individual's services, must keep him on an unclassified j until his security status can be established. The proposed new pr cedure would entitle an applicant, if his record is satisfactorily ex plained, to a certificate of clearance. Although the provisions of this legislation would not exempt applicant for Government employment from the customary agen loyalty procedures, it would afford an applicant an opportunity clear his record, if he considers that he has been denied employme by any Government agency because of derogatory information. This legislation was still pending at the adjournment of the 84 Congress, and should receive continuing study pointed toward a fave able conclusion. THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT Since the enactment of the Immigration and Nationality Act. important segment of the number of deportation cases prosecuted t the Department of Justice have involved subversive individua This does not mitigate the slowness of the Department in pressi deportation proceedings where warranted, but is cited as indication c the way in which the law protects and can be used further to prote the internal security of the Nation against subversive aliens. A though current statistics through fiscal 1956 have not at the mome been completed, prior records indicate that about 30 aliens we deported for subversive activity under the provisions of section (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. While this numb should have been far greater, it is of interest to note that all of the cases involved persons who ranked high within the Communist org ization as articulate and active propagandists, agitators, and w dangerous potential in sabotage and espionage. Some deportatio involving subversion were executed on the basis of criminal groun where such prosecutions could be handled more expeditiously, ev though combined grounds of subversive activity also would ha provided sufficient basis for the action. 1 S. 2376, 84th Cong., 1st sess. 2 Public Law 414, 82d Cong.; 66 Stat. 163 seq. |