LAW AND THE KKK

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

I have yet to hear a protest by the traditionally liberal voices against the idea of a House Un-American Activities Committee investigation of the Ku Klux Klan. But the use of the legislative power of investigation in the service of "exposure for the sake of exposure" will be no less abhorrent to the principles of a free society when it is directed against the Klan than when it is directed against Communists. Laws forbidding mere membership in the Klan will no more serve the cause of freedom than do the Smith Act and the Subversive Activities Control Act. And since such laws are, in the liberal view, unconstitutional, the proposed HUAC investigation can serve no valid legislative purpose.

It is a first principle of American law that guilt is not established by association--men are responsible for the acts that they themselves commit, and not for the acts of their friends, family, or associates. When any person or organization commits or conspires to commit a crime designed to overthrow the established government by force or violence, or to deprive individuals of the rights of American citizens, or to in timidate or oppress persons in the exercise of their constitutional rights, or to set upon and murder innocent citizens, white or black--then such persons can be adequately dealt with under our present system of laws, if their guilt can be established. The frightening aspect of Communist or Klan control laws is that they permit the government to punish people without actually proving such guilt--and by merely satisfying legislators that the organizations to which they belong are "subversive."

We have plenty of laws on the books to deal with the illegal activities of the Klan--if we could only get them enforced. Repressive, arbitrary, and unconstitutional Congressional action is not the answer to any problem, no matter how grave. Joel L. Sellg '65