A Slap at Censorship

U.S. District Judge A. Wallace Tashima reached the only possible conclusion recently in the case brought on behalf of six films that had been denied “certificates of educational character” by the United States Information Agency. The judge properly ruled that the process by which the agency chooses which films to certify, thereby granting them favorable tax treatment abroad, is unconstitutional on its face. The government may not decide what is truth.

All this comes about because of a 1949 international treaty designed to “promote the free flow” of educational, scientific and cultural films around the world. The government used the power to issue certificates under the treaty in a sinister way. Films with a political viewpoint different from the Reagan Administration’s were turned down, while films that agreed with the government’s views got the agency’s imprimatur.

The denial of a certificate to films like “In Our Own Backyards: Uranium Mining in the United States” and “Peace: A Conscious Choice” effectively meant that they could not be distributed overseas. Their producers could not meet the high tax burdens that foreign governments impose. These taxes are waived for films having certificates from the USIA.

Tashima, who heard the case in Los Angeles without a jury, declared forcefully and unequivocally that the Constitution does not allow this viewpoint discrimination. The USIA is “in the position of determining what is the ‘truth’ about America, politically and otherwise,” Tashima said. “This, above all else, the First Amendment forbids.”

The only legal way for the government to apply the treaty is to grant a certificate to every film that applies for one, or to no film. The government may not pick or choose on the basis of the content of the films.