42 Geo. L. J. 1 (1953-1954)
One for the Money, Two for the Show the Case against Televising Congressional Hearings

handle is hein.journals/glj42 and id is 15 raw text is: THE
GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL
VOLUME 42                     November, 1953                          NUMBER I
ONE FOR THE MONEY, TWO FOR THE SHOW
THE CASE AGAINST TELEVISING CONGRESSIONAL
HEARINGS
JOSEPH M. SNEE, Sj.*
Though the nature and extent of congressional power to investigate
have been the subject of much discussion, learned and otherwise, for
the past three decades,' new problems were raised by the decision of
the late Kefauver Committee2 to publicize the actual hearings by every
available medium, including radio, newsreels, and television. The tele-
vising of congressional investigations, heartily endorsed by the Kefauver
Committee4 and its members5 has been attacked on the floor of the
Senate,0 has occasioned several articles7 and a flood of newspaper com.
* A.B., Gonzaga College; M.A., Catholic University; LL.B., Georgetown University;
Cand. SJ.D., Harvard. Father Snee is a member of the Bar of the District of Columbia.
1 Boudin, Congressional and Agency Investigations: Their Uses and Abuses, 35 Va. L.
Rev. 143 (1949); Courdert, Congressional Inquisition v. Individual Liberty, 15 Va. L. Rev.
537 (1929) ; Cousens, The Purpose and Scope of Investigations under Legislative Authority,
26 GEoRGoEowN L. J. 905 (1938); Ehrman, The Duty of Disclosure in Parliamentary In-
vestigation: A Comparative Study, 11 Chi. L. Rev. 1 and 117 (1943 and 1944); Glassie
and Cooley, Congressional Investigations-Salvation in Self Regulation, 38 GEozom-rowN
L. J. 343 (1950); Herwitz and Mulligan, The Legislative Investigating Committee, 33
Col. L. Rev. (1933); Landis, Constitutional Limitations on the Congressional Power of
Investigation, 40 Harv. L. Rev. 153 (1926); Loring, Powers of Congressional Investigation
Committees, 8 Minn. L. Rev. 595 (1924); McGeary, The Congressional Power of In-
vestigation, 28 Neb. L. Rev. 516 (1949); Morgan, Congressional Investigations and Judicial
Review: Kilboum v. Thompson Revisited, 37 Cal. L. Rev. 556 (1949); Wigmore, Legis-
lative Power to Compel Testimonial Disclosure, 19 Ill. L. Rev. 452 (1924).
2 The Senate Special Committee to Investigate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce,
pursuant to S. 202, 81st Cong., 2d Sess. (1950).
8 Sen. Rep. No. 307, 82nd Cong., 1st Sess. (1951).
4 Sen. Rep. No. 307, 82nd Cong., 1st Sess. (1951); Sen. Rep. No. 725, 82nd Cong.,
1st Sess. (1951).
97 Cong. Rec. 9765-9802 (1951).
Ibid.
7 Arnold, Mob Justice and Television, 187 AUt. Monthly 68 (June 1951), reprinted in

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?