During the 1930s, the U. S. Supreme Court declared some parts of the New Deal unconstitutional. This letter is representative of common views that could have been expressed by a concerned citizen during this time. February 15, 1937 To the Editor: In the uproar that has followed President Roosevelt’s proposal to ease the pressure of the courts over social legislation by increasing the number of U. S. Supreme Court justices to 15, the real point at issue is in danger of being overshadowed. This point could be phrased in the form of a question: What would you do if you were president? I understand the president has heard from the farmers, workers, sharecroppers, coal miners, railway men, the unemployed, the small depositor, and has heard in no uncertain terms from the victims of the Dust Bowl. He is responsible, together with Democrats in Congress, for action on these issues. He has the tough job of thinking up ways to give millions of distressed people hope for a better and more secure existence. But when he devises such measures, what does he hit? A stone wall (the Supreme Court). Five old gentlemen say: “No, you can't do it.” Four old gentlemen say: “Yes, you can.” So the president can't take action to help our citizens. What is the president to do? What would you do? Tell the 27 million citizens who voted for the New Deal to forget their difficulties because five old gentlemen say it can’t be solved, or warn the five gentlemen that the people demand action? Sincerely, James Watson How did historical circumstances shape this citizen’s point of view? A. Congress refused to debate the merit of the president’s New Deal legislative proposals. A. Congress refused to debate the merit of the president’s New Deal legislative proposals. B. Years of difficult economic times made him willing to support unprecedented presidential action. B. Years of difficult economic times made him willing to support unprecedented presidential action. C. Involvement in a major war required the president to take strong action to