Robinson's Compromise

Robinson's Compromise

The issue that for five months has held Congress in a state of suspended animation was last week brought one decisive step closer to solution. Senator Joseph T. Robinson, deputed by the President to formulate a compromise on the question of enlarging the Supreme Court (TIME, June 14), last week made his choice and trotted it out before the Senate for a showdown. The bill he chose was modeled after one originally sponsored by Senators Hatch of New Mexico and Logan of Kentucky. Its chief terms as compared to those of the President's original proposal:

1) Instead of providing for the appointment of an additional Justice for each member of the Supreme Court over 70 1/2 years, it provides one extra Justice for each member over 75. This cuts down the possible number of new appointments from five (six before the retirement of Justice Van Devanter) to four.

2) The President would not be permitted to appoint more than one additional Justice in any calendar year. Thus all four additional Justices could not be seated before 1940, and if some elder Justices retired before that time all four might never be appointed.

3) Unlike the President's original proposal, this bill would not permanently enlarge the Court, for as judges over 75 retired they could not be replaced unless the Court was then left with fewer than nine members.

This week debate on the Robinson Compromise is to commence. Most opponents of the old bill declared themselves opposed to the new bill on principle, but observers agreed that if it could be brought to vote, Joe Robinson had lined up enough votes to pass it. First test of strength is expected when opponents try to refer the new bill to the Judiciary Committee where it would doubtless die. Second test of strength may come several weeks later when, after long but genuine debate, opponents may filibuster to prevent a vote.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.