Speech #900104591

They thus provided the usually almost imposslbletoget evidence of intent--and so they stand indicted today while scores of other violators have gone free. I should point out here that four of the leaders of this groupthe three I referred to who have been indicted for actually traveling to Cuba and one other who did not make the trip. although he helped arrange it and recruited others for ithave also been indicted on charges of conspiring illegally to set up this trip in violation of our travel laws. I do not believe that I am being unreasonable or unfair when I say I trust they are convicted. because certainly if they are not. after so gross and flagrant a violation and defiance of the law. it will mean that the key statute in this fieldthe Immigration and Nationality Actis almost worthless as an instrument for enforcing Presidential travel bans. Will H.R. 9045 correct the problenis I have just outlined? I believe it willbecause it makes it a crime simply to travel to. in. or through any country or area in which all travel has been banned by the President. or to travel in any country or area where travel has been banned without a passport specifically endorsed and authorized for such travel. The loopholes which exist in the present statutes. making effective prosecution impossible in many cases. are found in their reliance on the concept of departure from or entry into the United States (in the 1952 statute) and the concept of unlawful use of a passport (in the 1948 statute). H.R. 9045 eliminates these difficulties. I would like to say a little more here about the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision of February 20 of this year. reversing the conviction of William Worthy who. under section 1185 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. had been found quilty of entering the United States without a valid passport after visiting Cuba. The court held that it is unconstitutional to penalize a citizen abroad for reentering the United States without a valid passport. even though the citizens initial departure from this country was itself illegal. I strongly disagree with the result of this decision and particularly with the reasoning that it is unconstitutional to penalize a citizen for his reentry into the United States from proscribed travel abroad which had been initiated by an unlawful departure from this country.