Page images
PDF
EPUB

[S. 2392, 86th Cong., 1st sess.]

A BILL To establish the effectiveness of the Federal loyalty security program and the industrial security program

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in the administration of the Federal loyalty security program and the industrial security program no officer or agency of the Government shall be required to disclose confidential information or the identity of confidential informants; and any hearing with respect to security clearances conducted in connection with either of such programs shall be conducted in such manner as to protect from disclosure information affecting the national security or tending to compromise investigative sources or methods. SEC. 2. No payment shall hereafter be made by any agency in or under the Department of Defense to any contractor who has not agreed to withhold, or who willfully fails or refuses to withhold, all security information and access thereto (including access to any portion of any plant or facility under the control of such contractor where work of a security nature is being performed or may be performed) from any person not cleared by the appropriate agency of the Defense Department for access to military secrets.

BRIEFS FOR THE PARTIES IN THE CASE OF WILLIAM L. GREENE, PETITIONER v. NEIL H. MCELROY, THOMAS S. GATES, JR., AND ROBERT B. ANDERSON, RESPONDENTS, NO. 180, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, OCTOBER TERM, 1958

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER TERM, 1957

No. 180

WILLIAM L. GREENE, Petitioner,

บ.

NEIL M. MCELROY, THOMAS S. GATES, JR., AND
ROBERT B. ANDERSON, Respondents.

CARL W. BERUEFFY,

1625 Eye Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C.

Attorney for Petitioner

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Citations to Opinions Below

Jurisdiction

Questions Presented

Statutes Involved

Statement

Reasons for Granting the Writ

I. The existence of an unlimited power by any governmental official to deprive a citizen of present private employment, prevent him from obtaining other employment, and impose upon him a designation of disloyalty presents a novel question important to the constitutional rights of citizens which has not been, but should be, determined by this Court

II. The decision of the Court below is in conflict, with respect to an important constitutional issue, with Parker v. Lester, 227 F. 2d 708 (CA 9, 1955)

Conclusion

Appendices:

A. Memorandum opinion of the trial Court
B. Opinion of the Court of Appeals

C. Judgment of the Court of Appeals

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS:

5 U.S.C. § 22, R.S. § 161

Administrative Procedure Act, 60 Stat. 243, 5 U.S.C., § 1009

Armed Services Procurement Act of 1947, 62 Stat. 21, 41 U.S.C., §§ 151-161

Magnuson Act, 64 Stat. 427, 1038, 50 U.S.C., §§ 191, 192, 194

Executive Order 10290, September 27, 1951, 16 Fed. Reg. 9795

Executive Order 10501, December 15, 1953, 18 Fed. Reg. 7049

32 C.F.R., § 72.8 (1955), § 72.2-107 (Supp., 1956)

CASES:

Adkins v. Childrens' Hospital, 261 U.S. 525

Butchers' Union Slaughterhouse and Livestock Co. v. Crescent City Livestock Landing and Slaughterhouse Co., 111 U.S. 746

Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296
Coppage v. Kansas, 236 U.S. 1
Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall., 2

Endo, ex parte, 323 U.S.

Galvan v. Press, 347 U.S. 522

Garland, ex parte, 4 Wall., 333

Hamilton v. Kentucky Distilleries, 251 U.S. 146

Hannegan v. Esquire, 327 U.S. 146

Kent v. Dulles (decided June 16, 1957) 26 U.S. Law Week, 4413

Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390

Niemotko v. Maryland, 340 U.S. 268

Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388

Parker v. Lester, 227 F. 2d 708 (CA 9, 1955)

Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 353 U.S. 232
Slochower v. Board of Education, 350 U.S. 551
Truax v. Raich, 239 U.S. 33

United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303

United States v. Rumely, 345 U.S. 41

Von Knorr v. Miles, 60 F. Supp. 962 (D. Mass., 1943) Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183

Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579

OTHER REFERENCES:

Berle, The 20th Century Capitalist Revolution (1954) "Industry Goal: Simple Loyalty Check," Nation's Business, December, 1955, p. 40

Report of the Commission on Government Security

The Washington Post, November 11, 1954, p. 21

William L. Greene prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, entered in the above-entitled case on April 17, 1958.

CITATIONS TO OPINIONS BELOW

The memorandum opinion of the trial court, printed in Appendix A hereto, infra, pp. la to 4a, is reported sub nom. Greene v. Wilson, in 150 F. Supp. 958 (D.D.C., 1957). The opinion of the Court of Appeals, printed in Appendix B hereto, infra, pp. 5a to 23a, is reported in 254 F. 2d 944 (adv.). It is not yet reported in the U.S. App. D.C. reports.

JURISDICTION

The judgment of the Court of Appeals was entered April 17, 1958. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U.S.C., § 1254(1).

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Whether a justiciable controversy is presented by a suit for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging as invalid an order of the Secretary of the

« PreviousContinue »