TABLE OF CONTENTS Copy of S. 921, 85th Congress, to amend section 161 of the Revised Statutes with respect to the authority of Federal officers and agencies to withhold information and limit the availability of records_ Copy of S. 2148, 85th Congress, to amend section 3 of chapter 324 of the act of June 11, 1946 (60 Stat. 238) to clarify and protect the right of the public to information.... List of agencies and executive departments citing title 5, United President Dwight D. Eisenhower to the Secretary of Defense, May 17, 1954, including a memorandum to the President from the Attor- Article, "Demands of Congressional Committees for Executive Papers," (in three installments) by Herman Wolkinson, Federal Bar Journal, April, July, October, 1949.. Department of Justice study, "Is a Congressional Committee En- titled To Demand and Receive Information and Papers From the President and the Heads of Departments Which They Deem Con- Library of Congress study, "Selected Cases in Which Information Has Been Withheld From Congress By the Executive Department,' 63-146 Senate Document No. 99, 83d Congress, 2d session, "Congressional Power of Investigation, A Study Prepared at the Request of Senator William Langer, By the Legislative Reference Service of the Library Survey, of Withholding of Information From Congress, made by the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND SECRECY IN GOVERNMENT THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1958 UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:03 a. m., in room 104-B, Senate Office Building, Senator Thomas C. Hennings, Jr., chairman of the subcommittee, presiding. Present: Senators Hennings and Hruska. Also present: Charles H. Slayman, Jr., chief counsel and staff director; William D. Patton, assistant counsel; and Wayne H. Smithey, professional staff member, Committee on the Judiciary. Senator HENNINGS. Since the hour of 11 is a few moments past, the subcommittee will please come to order. I would like to make just a short opening statement, if I may. The Senate Constitutional Rights Subcommittee is very pleased indeed, and I want to add that I am particularly pleased, to have my friend, the Attorney General of the United States, accept our invitation to be with us today for a discussion of the important matter of freedom of information and its corollary, alleged unnecessary secrecy in Government. It is indeed most gratifying that we have our new Attorney General accepting our first invitation to be with us. The time and date agreed upon are those which proved most convenient and mutually satisfactory. To have the chief legal officer of the United States Government here this morning is indeed most gratifying to us all. We meet here today in the absence of any hostility or acrimony whatsoever. Questions of whether there is a legally recognized privilege lodged in the Chief Executive to withhold information from the Congress and the public on his own determination and, if so, whether such a privilege may be delegated to remote subordinate officials and employees are the basic questions which the chief legal officer of the executive branch, the Attorney General, we hope will discuss with us today. We look forward to hearing his analysis of the issues which are so intricately connected with the whole doctrine of checks and balances in our form of National Government. Only when the American people and their lawmakers have maximum access to accurate information, commensurate with genuine national defense interests, can our system of government operate in the most enlightening and useful manner. Accordingly, many of us believe the burden should be on public officials who withhold information to furnish sound reasons and lawful authority for so doing. 1 Again, I want to repeat that we are fortunate to have our Attorney General here with us today, in the spirit of good will, mutual respect, and trust. Now, Mr. Attorney General, you may, if you care to, proceed with any written statement that you have prepared that you would like to read, or you may testify in a more or less impromptu fashion, predicated upon your study and familiarity with this subject matter, or you may read your statement and intersperse it as you please. In other words, we are happy to give you full latitude to do exactly as you wish. I now recognize the distinguished Attorney General of the United States, Mr. William P. Rogers. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM P. ROGERS, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your comments and also I want to thank you for your courtesy in delaying my appearance until now. I do recall that I told you I would be happy to appear. Senator HENNINGS. You did, indeed. Mr. ROGERS. And I appreciate your giving me this time because I have been rather busy the last few weeks, and it was very helpful to me to be permitted to appear at this time this morning. I would like, with your permission, to read the prepared statement I have. I, of course, would be perfectly happy to be interrupted at any time. Senator HENNINGS. I might say, Mr. Attorney General, that Senator Roman Hruska, the distinguished Senator from Nebraska, has just come to the hearing. I have just made a short statement, Senator, a copy of which I will hand you if you care to read it, expressing our appreciation to the Attorney General for his being here this morning. Senator HRUSKA. Thank you. Senator HENNINGS. You may now proceed in any fashion you please, Mr. Rogers. Mr. ROGERS. I was saying, Mr. Chairman and Senator Hruska, that I think it advisable to present this statement or parts of it, at least, because I do think there is a good deal of misunderstanding in this field and I think that this committee is serving a useful purpose in that regard because I think it helps to clarify the matter. Preliminarily, I might say that I think that the mere stating of the question quite often causes misunderstanding because usually the question is stated in terms of what right does the Executive have to withhold information, and, is secrecy a good thing, and so forth, which suggests the answer. I think it is just as incorrect to state the question in those terms, suggesting that there is secrecy that should not exist and that the Executive is withholding things as it would be to state the question this way: What right does Congress have improperly to demand documents from the executive branch of the Government? I think if the question was stated that way, it would be unfair to the Congress. Senator HENNINGS. Yes, I think the converse would be equally true. Mr. ROGERS. I think that, really, the way to state the question is, as between the two branches of the Government and considering their powers under the Constitution, what exchange of information can be given. |