 had compiled without giving those organizations an opportunity to contest their inclusion on the list. As the persecution intensified and the purge got into full swing, President Truman in April 1950 issued another Executive Order which was even more stringent as it specified that employees should be dismissed if an investigation led to the conclusion that "there is reasonable doubt as to loyalty." This meant that an employee was considered guilty unless he or she could prove their innocence, but of course without a proper trial. The new Executive Order led to the reopening of 565 cases which were already resolved, since it was felt that in light of the new Order, there was doubt. The entire operation was Gestapo-like, arbitrary and despotic.
UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE ORDERS
William J. Schrenk Jr. published a critique of the Executive Order 9835 in the Michigan Law Review in 1948. He pointed out "admitting the likelihood of the programs legality, it is still open to question on the general ground of wise governmental policy. The serious implications of allowing "guilt by association" with a group denominated as subversive by the Attorney General, and of denying the accused any opportunity of confrontation or cross-examination of witnesses are pointed out eloquently in a recent statement by a group of prominent legal educators." Another critic John Lord OBrian published his views in the 1948 Harvard Law Review condemning "guilt by association" as a travesty of justice. He also pointed out that the first line of defense against communism was faith in the democratic institutions of America. The National Bar Association of Indiana in 1949 condemned the Order and highlighted that the "Loyalty Order" had operated "to establish guilt by association, to abolish the axiom that all men are innocent until proven guilty and to set up extra legal Boards with decisions not subject to judicial review."
A moral indictment of the Order was also done by A. L. Pomerantz, senior trial Counsel in the prosecution of Nazis in Nuremburg. As early as April 1947, in an address to a Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, he compared E. O. 9835 to Hitlers Laws of 1933. He highlighted that civil servants in Germany suffered similar fate under Hitler. According to Hitlers Laws, "no man is allowed to hold employment in Germany who proves by his conduct that he is not willing to serve loyally the German people and the Reich." He said that Hitler first attacked the communists but later moved on to the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats. Pomerantz concluded that the Executive Order "was the most ominous and most terrifying law or edict in the entire history of the USA and I dont except the Alien and Sedition Act."
President Truman and his staff must have been aware that the Executive Orders were in violation of the Constitution of the United States. But yet, they knowingly continued in the implementation of their unconstitutional policies and established a framework that permitted the FBI and the Congressional Committees to mercilessly persecute citizens and undermine the best traditions of American democratic culture.
The McCarthy era is better known for its Congressional Investigating Committees. They were the most important vehicles for extending the anti-communist crusade throughout the USA. Their activities took their focus beyond the small Communist Party to almost all the corners of America. Everyone was affected. The committees paralleled those of the Executive Branch. Congressional hearings were immune from due process requirements; so the Committees used the hearings to denounce, accuse and play to the "crowd" and the media. Two of the most powerful Committees were those of Senator McCarthys Permanent Investigating Subcommittee of the Government Operations Committee and Pat McCarrans Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SISS). Both conducted similar investigations to HUAC. In over one dozen States and some cities, Committees were established along HUAC LINES. The FBI and the anti-communist network gave technical assistance and provide