Haig V. Agee: Power To Revoke Passports :: essays research papers

Haig v. Agee Power to Revoke Passports     Whether a passport can be revoked or non has been a major question sincethe mid- 1800s. Haig v. Agee is a landmark Supreme Court case charging thatthe escritoire of State can not revoke a passport on the yard that the powerhas never been granted by the Congress to the secretarial assistant, and that revoking apassport violates the first and fifth amendments of the Constitution of theUnited States. Not only does the depositary of State have implied powers, butrevoking Agees passport did not violate any laws or rights.     In Haig v. Agee, the defendant claims that the Passport Act of 1926 doesnot grant the Secretary of State the right to revoke passports. However, thePassport Act does state that the Secretary of State is the only person who cangrant and withhold passport applications. And found upon later provisions, theSecretary can withhold applications if the party is involved with illegalactiv ities. If the Secretary of State can grant and withhold passports, was itimplied by the Congress that the Secretary has the powers to revoke passports?"The Secretary of State may grant and issue passports, and cause passports to begranted, issued, and verified in foreign countries by diplomatic representativesof the United States . . . downstairs such rules as the President shall designatedand prescribe for and on behalf of the United States, and no other person shallgrant, issue, or verify such passports." 22 U.S.C. 211a (1976 ed., Supp. IV).Since the Congress did not specify who has the powers to revoke passports, itshould be assumed that because the Secretary is the only person who can grantpassports, they are the only ones who can revoke passports on grounds of illegalactivities, such as treason. If you consider that Agees passport was revokedbecause he was uncovering secret CIA agents, he was undoubtedly committingtreason. Though treason is usually considered to be ap parent during times of war,treason can also be defined as placing national security in jeopardy, such asthe case of Agee. Agees passport should not only have been taken, he shouldhave been extradited and tried by a jury for the crime of treason.     Agee also claims that since the power to revoke passports was notdirectly disposed to the Secretary of State or the President, then in order to showthey have the power, they must have revoked many passports in the past and havethe Congress approval. However, the bespeak to revoke passports on the grounds of