[712] 64 Stat. 438, August 11, 1950, Sec. 3 (a), (f).
[713] 64 Stat. 149, May 10, 1950, Sec. 3 (a).
[714] 66 Stat. 163, June 27, 1952.
[715] 49 Stat. 1081, August 31, 1935, Sec. 2 (a).
[716] 58 Stat. 649, July 1, 1944, Sec. 4, 5.
[717] 60 Stat. 755, August 1, 1946.
[718] 62 Stat. 266, May 25, 1948.
CHAPTER X
[719] “The Constitution as Instrument and as Symbol,” 30 American Political Science Review, 1936, 1071 at 1077.
[720] Yet note Harold D. Lasswell’s suggestion: “It is important to view the court system as a whole and not limit ourselves entirely to the words uttered by the Supreme Court. The damage to private rights and civilian principles can be accomplished in the thousands of minor jurisdictions (Federal, State, Local) into which our country is divided. Much of this damage is not brought to the notice of the highest tribunal in the land, if at all, until years have elapsed. In one of our earliest crises of national security, for example, the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed (1798). Thousands of persons were imprisoned, and the Acts were presently repealed. Their constitutionality was never passed upon by the Supreme Court.” National Security and Individual Freedom (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950), pp. 45-46.