RECOMMENDATIONS The Congress should enact legislation to make clear its intent that individuals found to be security risks shall be ineligible to hold any employment in or under the Government of the United States, whether or not designated as "sensitive" positions. The Committee on the Judiciary, or an appropriate subcommittee thereof, should undertake a study to determine the constitutionality of legislation to make it a condition of Government employment in any capacity that the employee shall give responsive answers to any questions put to him by any authorized tribunal of the United States respecting his loyalty to the United States. The United States should take steps through proper channels to procure recognition by the United Nations that it is just as bad for an employee of an international organization to be working against the interests of a particular member nation as to be working for the interests of a particular member nation. The United States should take steps through proper channels to cause the United Nations to define the duties of its employees in such a way as not to put a premium upon disloyalty to an employee's own country. The International Organizations Employees Loyalty Board should by law be given authority to summon witnesses and compel testimony. The Congress should enact legislation along the lines of S. 3 of the 83d Congress (by Senator McCarran) and S. 782 of the 84th Congress (by Senator Capehart) to deal with the problem of disloyalty among Americans employed by international organizations. The Congress should enact legislation making it an offense to enter into collusion with a foreign government for the purpose of evading passport regulations of the United States. To meet the problem of misuse of passports, the Congress should consider legislation to (1) require a passport applicant to agree, as a condition for issuance of the passport, that when he has returned to the United States he will give the State Department an accurate report as to where he traveled abroad; and (2) provide penalties for making a false report with respect to such travels. The Congress should enact legislation similar to S. 3617 of the 84th Congress to permit State legislation for the purpose of combating subversive activity. 15 84th Congress) COMMITTEE PRINT REPORT OF THE 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 APPENDIX I DECEMBER 31, 1956 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1957 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY JAMES O. EASTLAND, Mississippi, Chairman ESTES KEFAUVER, Tennessee ALEXANDER WILEY, Wisconsin WILLIAM LANGER, North Dakota WILLIAM E. JENNER, Indiana ARTHUR V. WATKINS, Utah EVERETT MCKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illino's HERMAN WELKER, Idaho 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 THOMAS C. HENNINGS, JR., Missouri PRICE DANIEL, Texas WILLIAM E. JENNER, Indiana ARTHUR V. WATKINS, Utah HERMAN WELKER, Idaho JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland ROBERT MORRIS, Chief Counsel APPENDIX I For this printing, Appendix A has been removed from this section and is printed separately as Appendix II APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF CERTAIN CASES AFFECTING INTERNAL SECURITY Jay v. Boyd (1956), 351 U. S. 345 An alien whose deportation had been ordered because of membership in the Communist Party applied for suspension of deportation. After administrative hearings authorized by regulation of the Attorney General but not required by statute, a special inquiry officer found that the applicant met the statutory requirements for grant of discretionary relief. Nevertheless, suspension was denied on the basis of confidential information not disclosed to the alien. In habeas corpus proceedings the Court sustained the denial of the application. It declared that since the suspension of deportation was not a matter of right, but a matter of grace to be dispensed according to the discretion of the Attorney General, the use of confidential information was permitted, at least where the action was reasonable. Parker v. Lester (1955), 227 F. 2d 708 Seamen sued to enjoin enforcement of Coast Guard security reguations under which they were denied clearance for employment on nerchant vessels. Under these regulations they were notified after in initial determination to deny clearance was made. They were given he right to appeal, first to a local and then to a national appeal board, ut were not informed of the identity of their accusers. These reguations, as enforced and carried out by the Coast Guard, were held o deny plaintiffs due process of law. Plaintiffs were held to be ntitled to an injunction against further enforcement of the reguations and any acts pursuant thereto which would tend to deprive hem of their employment as seamen on merchant vessels. Grossman v. United States (1956), 229 F.2d 775 The conviction of a witness before the House Un-American Activiies Committee for willful refusal to answer a question as to whether e refused to produce records of an organization, was reversed because he witness, after claiming the privilege against self-incrimination, ad not been specifically directed to answer that question. |