Speech #860180967

I heard the reading of an opinion. which was most startling to me as a lawyer. It was an opinion in the case of Girouard versus the United States. which Is reported in 328 U.S. at page 61. This case involved the question whether an alien could become a naturalized citizen of the United States if he were unwilling to bear arms in defense of the United States. That question had been before the Supreme Court of the United States three times during a period of approximately 25 years next preceding that day. On each of those three occasions. the Supreme Court had interpreted the act of Congress in respect to the oath required of persons applying for naturalization. and had held. in express terms. that no alien could become a naturalized citizen of the United States unless he were willing to bear arms in defense of the United States against any 91 See the earlier views of the late Chief Justice Hughes as expressed in his book. "The Supreme Court of the United States." pp. 3940. enemy of the United States which undertook to destroy the United States by force of arms. Involved In those three previous cases and in that case was the requirement that a person applying for naturalization take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States against all enemies. foreign and domestic. and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same. Manifestly. Mr. President. a person cannot support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States against all enemies. foreign and domestic. which undertake to destroy the United States and its Constitution and laws by force. unless he is willing to bear arms for the defense of the United States against such enemies. Any other conclusion is a linguistic impossibility as well as a legal impossibility. Subsequent to the handing down of those three decisions holding that no person could become a naturalized citizen of the United States unless he were willing to bear arms in defense of the United States against an enemy which sought to destroy the United States by force of arms. certain Members of the Congress introduced bills to change the interpretation placed upon the naturalization statute by the Supreme Court of the United States in those three cases. Congress clearly manifested its determination that the interpretation placed upon its act by the Supreme Court of the United States in those three cases expressed the true congressional intent by refusing to pass any of the bills which. in effect. proposed a change of that interpretation. Moreover. in addition to that.