Page images
PDF
EPUB

Thus far, I have tried to present a background so that I could dis

cuss my case with the FEA, and you would have a better understanding of

some of the principles of law involved and an insight into those mat

ters which give me deep concern.

My case is an unusual one, as it is a Civil Rights case concerning

a small businessman.

At the present time, the papers and supporting documents concerning

the law and the facts are about three inches thick, and I anticipate that

before a decision is rendered, they will be six inches thick. You can

understand that with this volume of information, it would require

several lectures to cover the details.

I shall discuss some of the

highlights.

Prior to being placed in court, I was threatened with being turned

over to the Justice Department. I say threatened, those with the FEA

thought they were threatening me, but really, they threw Brer Rabbit in

the Briar Patch.

It is heartbreaking that there are some in and out of

government who use the Justice Department to frighten the American cit

izen.

The JustICE Department is not in business for the sole purpose

of prosecuting criminals:

it should be respected and not feared.

Once

in court, the Justice Department takes over, and the FEA becomes their

client. This is to my advantage.

My defense is laid out based on the denial of my First Amendment

right of free speech, and the right to redress government of my griev

ances.

Also the violation of my rights under the Fourth Amendment guar

anteeing protection against unreasonable search of my records and

thi violation of my 'Fifth Amendment rights of due process. Because my

constitutional rights are being violated, these being my Civil Rights,

this becomes a Civil Rights case.

Our attorney, Mr. William (Bi11) Cooney, receives the credit for

introducing Civil Rights into the case.

As this case was a violation

of my constitutional rights, he said that it would also be a violation

of my civil rights. So with this, we began to focus on Civil Rights.

He asked me to assist him in the research on Civil Rights, as this was

his first venture into this field of law.

I found the research fascinat

ing.

I began the research with a psychological prejudice, as perhaps

some of you would, since I had believed that Civil Rights laws were for

a minority group.

It is my country and my law and I shall use it. It

is your country and your law, and you, too, can use it, but to use it,

you must call upon the force of law.

If this were a case against a state agency, the law is well settled

and there would be little to do other than ask for the decision.

This

being a matter between me and a federal agency, I must overcome the law

made by Justice Douglas, and also the implication that it is the intent

of Congress to provide immunity to federal employees for their mistakes

whether they be honest or dishonest.

The FEA has subpoena ed our companies' leases.

In a recent court case

with Shell Oil Company, the court ruled that the FEA was without legal

authority to inquire into leases; the court also ruled that rent was not

the same as prices.

The court also ruled that certain FEA regulations

referring to leases and rents were unconstitutional.

I would think this

becomes a moot question and leaves very little for our District Court

to decide.

One of the regulations in question concerns FEA investigations of

records, which I quotes

Inspection. Records required to be kept under

Paragraph (a) shall be made available for inspec

tion at any time upon the request of a repre-
sentative of the FEO (A) (Sec. 210.192 (b) ).

One would need only to have had a decent course in civics to know

that this regulation fails to meet the Fourth Amendment requirements.

This regulation says investigations may be made' any time, day or night,

weekend or holidays, without notice and does not require the test of

reasonableness. Furthermore, it has a Nazi and Fascist flavor, and is

repugnant to our American principles. I shall ask the court to rule

this regulation null and void as being unconstitutional.

I sought under my Fifth Amendment rights due process and under the

rules of the court to obtain depositions of several FEA employees.

The

court granted my prayer. If this situation were not serious, it would

be comical.

No one can imagine the organized confusion within the FEA.

Ordinarily, court logic is to first look at the subpoena to see if

it is valid on its face, second to look and see if the FEA met the tech

nical requirements of the law in the filing of its papers, and lastly,

to look at the merits of the case.

I shall ask the court to reverse its

logic. This request can be made in no other type case than a civil

rights one.

It is highly suspect that the subpoena is invalid, and unless we can

have the court reverse its ordinary logic, the case stops at this point.

It is also highly suspect that the FEA was deficient in the filing of

its papers, and here, too, the case would come to an end. This may

help you to understand why it is so difficult to get a court decision

on a constitutional issue, since genreally the case is decided before

its me rits are even considered.

There is only a remote chance that I will get an unfavorable decision,

but what I want to get is a decision based on the Fourth Amendment:

one

that would go into the law books, on which others might rely. Regardless

of the outcome, the law developed in the Civil Rights field has been

worth the effort put forth, and can be used by others to their benefit

once they learn that it is an effective avenue of law in dealing with

governmental agencies. You should remember, I could not have initiated the action, but when the FEA placed me in the Federal Court, I gained

some advantages by being a defendant, or as the records state, the

respondent.

In discussing this case, I used the first person, as the FEA placed

me in the courts, and it is my case.

Mr. Bill Cooney, our attorney, is

due much credit and praise, as he has not only loaned me his intellect

and talent, but also his heart.

Litigation is expensive from both a time and money viewpoint, and

is not to be recommended unless it seems to be the only avenue for a

redress of grievances.

In my case, because the very heart if my

government is at stake, and my most precious possession, i.e., my rights under the U.S. Constitution were and have been taken away, what

this case has cost in time and money will be the best investment I have

made in my life time.

In closing, I would like to reiterate one important point:

We stand facing two giants. We are frightened on the one hand by

big business, and on the other by big government. We see our

freedom slipping away by degrees, and an oppressive government

being run by uncontrollable bureaucrats.

We must do as David of old

did, use our sling-shots, and with a few pebbles, slay the giants.

Working together, we can sling a lot of pebbles.

« PreviousContinue »