Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
other act which the judge holds to be violative of the injunction.
The accused citizen also would be deprived of the onstitutional right to be confronted by the witnesses against him and faced with the prospect of prison bars on the un-eross-examined statements in the affidavit of his accuser. The civil rights legislation would take away, in the cases covered by it, the presumption of innocence under which every accused person expects to come into court for the /rial of his case. Instead, the ac cused would be required to show' cause why he should not be punished for doing—or “being about to"—do some act.
In violation* of Constitutional priciples. the citizen could be placed in double jeopardy for the same alleged offense, for, if cleared of contempt by a judge, he could be indicted in a new proceeding based on the same incident. Constitutional guarantees of free speech, free press and free assembly would be infringed, as citizens would be under threat of contempt action should they speak, write or discuss critically in assembly the injunction in question.
The bill’s requirement that citizens come before a federal commission with any books and records which the commission believes has to do with civil rights presses down on the 4th Amendment's guarantee against unreasonabble esarches arjd seizures; the 6th Amendment’s provision for a speedy and public trial likewise would be infringed, because an equity court is not required to sit
’i
58.1%