Speech #820214048

The fourth amendment to the Constitution protects citizens and aliens alike from unreasonable searches and seizures. This amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and hence requires a showIng of probable cause. Sections 235 and 287 (a) of S. 2550 authorizes any immigration officer or employee to board and search without a warrant any conveyance or vehicle withIn a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States and any such conveyance or vehicle anywhere when it is believed that aliens are being brought into the United States. This means that without probable cause that an alien is being illegally transported into the country. any immigration officer may board and inspect the automobile of a citizen of the United States. This provision is unconstitutional. I respectfully submit. Mr. President. that there is serious question as to the constitutionality of this provision. Further. section 241 (a) (7) authorIzes the deportation of an alien who engages or has a purpose to engage in conduct defined as prejudicial to our interests or who has a purpose to organize. join. or participate in subversive organizations designated by the Attorney General. Lack of knowledge of the subversive character of the organization is a defense only where the aliens participation occurred prior to publication of the name of the organization by the Attorney General in the Federal Register. Hence. an alien may be deportable if he had reason to believe that the organization was subversive prior to its designation by the Attorney General. The Attorney General is the sole judge of the reasonableness of the aliens belief. And by the terms of the bill. if the Attorney General determines in 1952 that any legally resident alien who entered the United States in 1910 was at that time likely to at some time join. for instance. the Washington Book Shop. a subversive organization distributing popular books at a discount. he can deport him without any finding that the alien himself was or is subversive. Because of vagueness of the conception of what may be prejudicial to our interestssee Jordan v. DeGeorge (341 U. S. 223)-as well as because of the fact that the section would require deportation because of a persons state of mind. It cannot be sustained as being in harmony with our Constitution. Section 242 (b) would for the first time in our history allow an order of deportation to be made in absentia. Convictions in absentia are not valid and we seriously question the validity of a deportation order entered in absentia. even if an alien has been afforded a reasonable opportunity to be present. It will be noted that in matters of this character. the tendency of the Supreme Court has been to apply criminal standards. See the DeGeorge case. previously cited. Certainly a conviction could not be sustained on the ground that the criminal has been given a reasonable opportunity to be present and refused to take advantage of it. At any rate. such procedure for the deportation of aliens should be abhorrent to us and there is no necessity for the same. in order to protect our national rights and interests. We can do this job. Mr.