News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
Judge E. E. Everett has revived interest in the Macintosh decision of the Supreme Court by granting citizenship to Professor J. P. Klassen of Bluffton, College at Lima, Ohio. Professor Klassen refused to take the oath to bear arms in defense of this country because of his religious beliefs as a Mennonite.
The Macintosh case, unpopular as it was with liberal thinkers, had good basis in law. It was formed on precedent and on accepting the Constitution as it stands. It pointed out "that citizenship is a high privilege, and when doubts exist concerning a grant of it, generally at least, they should be resolved in favor of the United States against the claimant." But it is doubtful that the act of 1906 which determined the qualifications for naturalization implied that a man should not be naturalized if, because of religious belief, he is opposed to war or unwilling to support arms.
During the Great War there were many examples of citizens who were conscientious objectors and were not forced to fight as long as they helped the cause in some way. Though this argument has little force from a strictly legal point of view, it carries considerable weight with a thinking public. To many people, moreover, it is not very clear why this country should stand behind a legal distinction which the unscrupulous find no difficulty in avoiding and which excludes from citizenship men like Macintosh and Klassen who are excellently qualified in every other respect.
Although Judge Everett offers convincing arguments for his decision, the case is so like that of Macintosh that if it is appealed to a higher court. Professor Klassen's citizenship will, in all probability be revoked. If the professor should try an appeal to the Supreme Court. It is doubtful that his case will receive lengthy consideration, for the five justices responsible for the outcome of the Macintosh case still hold their positions. Nevertheless, Judge Everett's effort to oppose the august body is not without important significance, for it again calls public attention to a question worthy of further consideration.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.