N.J. Constitutional Convention: Vol. 4, Page 187
MR. BROGAN: What the court is going to do?
MR. HARRIS: That's right.
MR. BROGAN: That's rather a strong indictment of the Supreme Court.
MR. HARRIS: Right.
MR. BROGAN: And we have heard it from nobody else.
MR. HARRIS: I am saying that they are prone to substitute their opinion in certiorari on matters dealing with facts, which is outside the rule which they have laid down that if there are legitimate facts they will sustain them.
MR. BROGAN: Doesn't the statute enjoin them so to do, to determine law and fact as it seems best? I am talking about the fifth section of the old Certiorari Act.
MR. HARRIS: I know. I am only saying that sometimes they have gone abroad on the facts in their conclusions.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: You wouldn't suggest that in a Constitution we have any provision that governs the extent of review.
MR. HARRIS: No, but why not do as Hannoch has been urging? Why not have a writ of review, a single writ which could take care of all these matters that have been taken care of by three writs.
MR. BROGAN: Would that eliminate the vice you point to?
MR. HARRIS: No.
MR. BROGAN: Then what good is the recommendation?
MR. HARRIS: The recommendation goes back to what I said before. Perhaps what I said about the writ of certiorari is not the main subject at all but -
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Would you suggest a review from all administrative agencies? Would you suggest that the Constitution contain anything on that subject, or that that be left entirely for legislative determination?
MR. HARRIS: Well, I understand, under the 1944 proposal, that the Chief Justice would have, under its flexibility, the right to make a division of the Superior Court which would handle all those matters.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: I wasn't thinking of that, Dean. I am interested in knowing whether you think the Constitution should deal with the extent of review of administrative agencies?
MR. HARRIS: I don't think the Constitution should.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: You would leave that entirely to legislative action?
MR. HARRIS: I think the less you say in the Constitution, the better; the broader you make it, the better.
Now, coming back to the Committee's work, I think those two sections should have something done to them and I think some-
Previous Page in Book ********* Table of Contents *********** Next Page in Book
|