PART VI HEARINGS HELD ON-Continued S. 1, S. 716 AND S. 1400 (National Security, Rules of Criminal Procedure, Antitrust, Page May 2, 3 and 23, 1973_ PART VII S. 1 and S. 1400 (Codification, Indian law, national security, capital June 8, 1973_. 5427-5685 5687 Bank, Harold, Attorney At Law, New York, N.Y__. Broderick, Vincent L., Chairman, Committee on Federal Legislation, New York County Lawyers' Association____ Dillman, Grant, Vice President and Washington Bureau Chief of UPI___. 5826 5929, 5940 5694 Fishbein, General Counsel, National Association of Theater 6020 Florence, Mrs. Heather, on behalf of the Association of American 5702 Hall, Prof. Livingston, Committee on Reform of Federal Criminal 5783 6100 Israel,Hon. Richard J., Attorney General of Rhode Island_. Karp, Irwin, General Counsel, The Authors League of America, Keirnan, Richard, President, International Conference of Police Lawrence, Joe, Makah Indian Tribes_ Lefcoe, Vann H., Assistant Attorney General of Virginia___. 6009 5745 5729, 5756 5999 5888 6009, 6019 5950 5904 5688 5888 5901 Tonasket, Mel, from the Colville Confederated Tribes_. 5888 6038 STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY: American Broadcasting Company 5774 American Jewish Congress, Commission on Law, Social Action and Urban Affairs__. 5777 American Library Association__. 5759 CBS Law Dept. Memorandum__ 5751 Engdahl, Prof. David E., University of Colorado School of Law__ Fleishman, Stanley, attorney for Adult Film Association of America, presented by John Weston__. 6116 6090 Fraternal Order of Police, letter from Louis R. Damiani, Vice President, July 31, 1973, with statement supporting capital punishment 6004 V Hornby, William H., Executive Editor, The Denver Post, and International Film Importers and Distributors of America, Inc__ Page 5701 6111 5764 National Association of Broadcasters, by Vincent T. Wasilewski, 5765 National Association of Theatre Owners_ 6029 National Broadcasting Company, Inc., New York, N.Y. 5767 5769 Sabo, Ronald W., Research Director, California Lutheran 6114 EXHIBITS: (The) Aftermath of Furman: The Florida Experience, The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, vol. 64, No. 1____ 5956 Anderson hits Nixon privilege view, Chicago Sun-Times, Apr. 12, 1973 5773 Can prosecute newsmen for stolen data: Justice aide, Chicago 5772 Espionage: The American Judicial Response. An In Depth Analy- 5831 5795 5935 6010 5927 6009 Resolution by National Association of Attorneys General__. Senate Resolution 477, declaring that the Senate rejects the findings and recommendations of the Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, with excerpts from the Senate Debate, Oct. 13, 1970_. 6043 The Outer Limits of Free Speech, Christian Science Magazine, 6112 Tighter law is sought on U.S. documents, Chicago Sun-Times, 5773 REFORM OF FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWS PART VII FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 1973 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL LAWS AND PROCEDURES, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:10 a.m., in Room 3308. Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Sam J. Érvin, Jr. [chairman] presiding. Present: Senator Ervin [presiding]. Also present: G. Robert Blakey, chief counsel; Paul C. Summitt, deputy chief counsel; Dennis C. Thelen, assistant counsel; Kenneth A. Lazarus, minority counsel; Mable A. Downey, clerk; and William E. Pursley, Jr., chief counsel, Judiciary Subcommittee on Revision and Codification of Laws. Senator ERVIN. The committee will come to order. In continuing these hearings on the revision of the Federal criminal code, the Subcommittee on Criminal Laws and Procedures will today focus primarily on the First Amendment implications of the national security and obscenity provisions of S. 1 and S. 1400. I am pleased to be able to assist Senator McClellan in chairing this particuiar session of the subcommittee's hearings because I believe that properly balancing the interests of national security and first amendment freedoms is one of the most important and difficult tasks of this subcommittee in rewriting the Federal criminal code. Many of our citizens have become suspicious of Government's commitment to First Amendment principles. In my opinion, the phrase "national security" has too often been carelessly invoked to ustify governmental policies, decisions, and actions which undermine these principles without serving any reasonable national interest. The Government's attempt in 1971 to enjoin publication by several newspapers of the so-called Pentagon papers is an example of such a mistake. The over-classification of Government information and documents is another example. Mistakes such as these have not only caused many Americans to question their Government's commitment to First Amendment principles, but have also tended to undermine the legitimacy of reasonable and necessary Government policies which serve the purpose of protecting national security. In an earlier hearing on the national security provisions of S. 1 and S. 1400, Senator Hruska properly cautioned us to consider the Sometimes competing interests of national security and First Amend |