Washington – The Justice Supreme Court to throw some legal world of homosexuality. The in two immigration cases now before the high court which question the government’s poser to deport alien homosexuals as undesirable persons based on their “psychopathic personalities.” A U. S. court of appeals in California ruled that homosexuals are not deportable. A U. S. court of appeals in New York ruled that they are. NOTING the kinsey Report’s conclusion that 37 per cent of American males have at least one homosexual experience during their lifetimes, a dissenting New York judge added: “To label so large a group (homosexuals) as ‘excludable aliens’ would be tantamount to saying that Sappho, Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Andre Gide and even Shakespeare, were they to come to life again, would he deemed unfit to visit our shores.

“Indeed, so broad a definition might well comprise more than a few members of legislative bodies.” IN VIEW of these opposing decisions, the conflict is one that should he settled by the high court, the Justice Department said. The main question: Is it constitutionally permissible to impose any legal measures on consenting adults who engage in homosexual conduct in the privacy of their homes without causing a public scandal or nuisance? The issue arose in the case of a 32-year-oid Canadian who settled in the United States as a permanent resident in 1954 in New York City. HE TESTIFIED that he had been a homosexual since he was he had also engaged * 16 although in relations with women from i* time to time.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service tried lu deport him in 1964 after he was acquitted on a charge of disorderly conduct. He has never been convicted of a crime and has lived with his mother and helped to sup port his family. The second case involves a uality a crime, under one guise or another. Congress has banned it in the federal jurisdictions and Washington. The Supreme Court never has had a test criminal case on the issuer of “reasonableness.” Department has urged the U.S. constitutional light into the shadowy surprise government move came 42-ycar-old Canadian who lives in San Francisco. He was convicted of a disorderly charge in connection with homosexual activity. Although he testified that he is a confirmed homo. sexual, he also has relations with women, THE: GOVERNMENT claimed that both men would have been excluded from entry into this country had the government known at the time that they were homosexuals. The basis of the exclusion power in a section in the Immigration Act barring “psychopathic personalities.” The psychiatric testimony in both cases was conflicting, and as usual, the psychiatrics became tangled up in the semantics of defining a “psychopathic personality.”

But the evidence showed that both men were self-supporting, apparently responsible alien residents whose homosexual activities appeared to be of a rather common variety, without any particularly unusual symptoms. ‘WHATEVLR the phrase “psychopathic personality may mean In the psychiatrist,” said a New York judge, “to Congress it was intended to include homosexuals and sex perverts.” The difficulty is that, while Congress may exclude any foreigner for any cause, it can only deport resident foreigners for a “reasonable”‘ cause. And that, of course, is the crux of the constitutional problem: Is it “reasonable” lo deport homosexuals and to class them with drug addicts, prostitutes and thieves? ALI. STATES make homosexuality a crime under one guise or another.