Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1944, Europe, Volume IV

861.01B/11–2844

Memorandum by Mr. Richard W. Flournoy of the Office of the Legal Adviser to the Chief of the Division of Eastern European Affairs (Bohlen)

[Washington,] November 28, 1944.

Mr. Bohlen: Since our discussion of this case over the telephone before lunch I have given it further consideration and am obliged to say that I do not see how it is possible for the Secretary of State to avoid the necessity of approving or disapproving the deportation of Kravchenko to Russia, in view of the following proviso to the act of July 1, 1940:

“Provided, That no alien who has been or who may hereafter be, admitted into the United States under clause (1) of section 3, as an official of a foreign government, or as a member of the family of such official, shall be required to depart from the United States without the approval of the Secretary of State.”

As I have pointed out in previous memoranda, the deportation of aliens from this country is distinctly a matter for determination under our own domestic law and policy. The Soviet authorities evidently wish to have Kravchenko sent to Russia in order that they may punish him, and presumably they wish to impose the death penalty. Aside from the fact that deportation is distinctly our own business, it appears to me that the sending of this man to Russia for liquidation would be in violation of the principles for which this Government has stood. In this regard see my attached memorandum of April 28, 1944,³³ which Mr. Hackworth initialed.

If you wish to return this file, I will take the matter up further with Mr. Hackworth.

P. S. The Secretary might inform the Ambassador that he is not called upon to make a decision unless the Attorney General requests him to do so with reference to the Act of July 1, 1940, but the Ambassador would probably reply asking the Secretary to bring the matter of deportation to the attention of the Attorney General.³⁴ R. W. F.

33. Ante, p. 1228.
34. In a memorandum on the next day, Mr. Bohlen wrote: “It is not felt that the Department of State should be called upon to instruct Justice what to do in this case, but merely as the law provides to indicate that although he [Kravchenko] was, an official he no longer has that status and that therefore the State Department would not object to any action against Kravchenko which the law and practice of the United States dictates in cases of this kind.” (861.01B11/11–2944)