No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 August 2014
There was no change in the personnel of the Supreme Court during the 1952 Term. But following the close of the Term, on September 8, 1953, Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson, who had been appointed to the Court by President Truman in 1946, died unexpectedly at the age of 63. To replace him President Eisenhower gave a recess appointment to Governor Earl Warren of California on October 2. The new Chief Justice was sworn in on October 5.
Two important developments in the constitutional law field during the period under review occurred outside the Court. One was the publication by the Government Printing Office, in 1953, of a newly revised annotated Constitution of the United States, prepared by the Legislative Reference Service under the editorship of Edward S. Corwin. The annotations come down to June 30, 1952. The last annotated Constitution was published in 1938 under the editorship of W. C. Gilbert. The new work, an ample book of about 1400 large pages, is indispensable for students of American government.
Noteworthy also was the appearance of the first two volumes of William Winslow Crosskey's monumental study of the American Constitution, under the title of Politics and the Constitution in the History of the United States.
1 Printed as Sen. Doc. 170, 82d Cong., 2d sess. The price is $6.25.
2 University of Chicago Press, 1953, 1410 pp.
3 The Autumn, 1953 issue of the University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 21, pp. 1–92 Google Scholar, contains four full-length articles on the Crosskey opus, written by Abe Krash, Charles E. Clark, Charles Fairman, and Walton H. Hamilton. For other reviews and review articles see: Corbin, Arthur L. and Braden, George D., Yale Law Journal, Vol. 62, pp. 1137–54 (June, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Durham, James A., California Law Review, Vol. 41, pp. 209–29 (Summer, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Peters, Roger Paul, Notre Dame Lawyer, Vol. 28, pp. 307–32 (Spring, 1953)Google Scholar; Jeffrey, William B. Jr., Louisiana Law Review, Vol. 13, pp. 638–41 (May, 1953)Google Scholar; Nevins, Allan, New York Times Book Review, May 31, 1953, p. 7 Google Scholar; Swisher, Carl B., Saturday Review of Literature, Vol. 36, pp. 33–34 (April 4, 1953)Google Scholar; Wilmerding, Lucius Jr., Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 68, pp. 467–70 (Sept., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Clark, Charles E., The Nation, Vol. 176, pp. 505–8 (June 13, 1953)Google Scholar; Nettels, C. P., Chicago Sunday Tribune April 19, 1953, p. 9 Google Scholar; Boorstin, Daniel J., Commentary, Vol. 16, pp. 602–4 (Dec., 1953)Google Scholar; and McCloskey, Robert G., this Review, Vol. 47, pp. 1152–58 (Dec., 1953)Google Scholar.
4 See my review in The Progressive, Vol. 17, pp. 36–39 (Oct., 1953)Google Scholar.
5 For other writings during the period under review dealing with various aspects of constitutional and Supreme Court history see: The Words of Justice Brandeis, ed. Goldman, Solomon (N.Y., 1953)Google Scholar; Bartley, Ernest R., The Tidelands Oil Controversy (Austin, Texas, 1953)Google Scholar; Pound, Roscoe, The Lawyer from Antiquity to Modern Times (St. Paul, 1953)Google Scholar; Vanderbilt, Arthur T., The Doctrine of Separation of Powers and Its Present-Day Significance (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Note, “Judge Spencer Roane of Virginia: Champion of State Rights,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 1242–59 (May, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Waite, Edward F., “How ‘Eccentric’ was Mr. Justice Harlan?,” Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 37, pp. 173–87 (Feb., 1953)Google Scholar; Morgan, Donald G., “The Origin of Supreme Court Dissent,” William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 10, pp. 353–77 (July, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Swisher, Carl B., “Needed: A Rededicated Supreme Court,” The Johns Hopkins Magazine, April, 1953, pp. 3–14 Google Scholar; Sutherland, Arthur E., “The Supreme Court and the General Will,” Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 82, No. 4, pp. 169–97 (April, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rostow, Eugene V., “The Democratic Character of Judicial Review,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 193–224 (Dec., 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gerhart, Eugene C., “A Decade of Mr. Justice Jackson,” New York University Law Review, Vol. 28, pp. 927–74 (May, 1953)Google Scholar; Mason, Alpheus T., “The Supreme Court: Instrument of Power or Revealed Truth, 1930–1937,” Boston University Law Review, Vol. 33, pp. 279–336 (June, 1953)Google Scholar; Pusey, Merlo J., “Chief Protector of the Constitution,” N. Y. Times Magazine, September 20, 1953, pp. 13, 32–33 Google Scholar. See also: Judicial Administration and the Common Man, Annals of the American Academy, Vol. 287 (May, 1953)Google Scholar.
6 See Harper, Fowler V. and Pratt, George C., “What the Supreme Court Did Not Do during the 1951 Term,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 101, pp. 439–79 (Jan., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stern, Robert L., “Denial of Certiorari Despite a Conflict,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 465–72 (Jan., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 See especially Rosenberg v. United States, 344 U.S. 889 (1952).
8 107 F. Supp. 128.
9 201 F. 2d 372.
10 345 U.S. 942.
11 A complete log of all the legal proceedings in the Bridges saga is given by Konvitz, Milton R., Civil Rights in Immigration (Ithaca, N.Y., 1953), pp. 114–20Google Scholar. See especially Bridges v. Wixon, 326 U.S. 135 (1945).
12 Bridges v. United States, 346 U.S. 209 (1953). The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had ruled on a variety of constitutional issues, including double jeopardy and due process questions, 199 F. 2d 811, but the Supreme Court's grant of certiorari limited drastically the scope of review, 345 U.S. 904.
13 In United States v. Grainger, 346 U.S. 235 (1953), by a 5–3 vote, the Court held that an attempt to obtain payments from the Commodity Credit Corporation based upon knowingly false allegations of purchases not in fact made, and a false certification of a price actually paid, was a fraud covered by the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act because the fraud was pecuniary in character, and because fraud was the essential element of the offense.
14 Circuit Judge Frank said: “Since two of the defendants must be put to death if the judgments stand, it goes without saying that we have scrutinized the record with extraordinary care to see whether it contains any of the errors asserted on this appeal.” 195 F. 2d 583, 590. The Supreme Court denied certiorari, 344 U.S. 838 (1952) and a rehearing, 344 U.S. 889 (1952), with Justice Black dissenting on both occasions.
15 345 U.S. 989 (1953). The Court also declined to hear oral argument. Four Justices thought oral argument should have been allowed.
16 346 U. S. 271 (1953).
17 For Justice Douglas' opinion see 346 U.S. 313 (1953).
18 346 U.S. 273 (1953).
19 345 U.S. 229 (1953). See generally: “Developments in the Law: Immigration and Nationality,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 643–745 (Feb., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bullitt, Stimson, “Deportation as a Denial of Substantive Due Process,” Washington Law Review, Vol. 28, pp. 205–22 (Aug., 1953)Google Scholar; Heckman, Jerome H., “Our Immigration Laws, A Continuing Affront to the Administrative Procedure Act,” Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 364–93 (March, 1953)Google Scholar; Note, “Constitutional Restraints on the Expulsion and Exclusion of Aliens,” Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 37, pp. 440–58 (May, 1953)Google Scholar; Wasserman, Jack, “The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952—Our New Alien and Sedition Act,” Temple Law Quarterly, Vol. 27, pp. 62–89 (Summer, 1953)Google Scholar; Comment, , “The Alien and the Constitution,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 547–69 (Spring, 1953)Google Scholar.
20 Report of the Proceedings of the Regular Annual Meeting of the Judicial Conference of the United States, September 24–25, 1953, pp. 42–43.
21 Rubinstein v. Brownell, 206 F. 2d 449.
22 74 S. Ct. 122.
23 Report (cited in note 20), p. 43.
24 344 U.S. 590 (1953). Justice Minton dissented without opinion.
25 U.S. ex rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 537 (1950).
26 In Yanish v. Barber, 73 S. Ct. 1105 (1953), Justice Douglas, sitting alone, ruled that an alien held for deportation has a right to release on bail while appealing to a Court of Appeals a denial of habeas corpus by a district court where the appeal presented a substantial question. Bail is designed not only to provide security for the appearance of the prisoner, but also to protect his right to appeal. Justice Douglas also ruled that while the discretion of the Attorney General in regard to bail is very broad, its exercise is subject to judicial review, in accordance with the teaching of Carlson v. Landon, 342 U.S. 524 (1952). The habeas corpus action arose from a refusal of Yanish to execute a bond required by the Attorney General which attached a number of conditions he found objectionable, such as giving up familial associations.
27 345 U.S. 206 (1953).
28 Mandoli v. Acheson, 344 U.S. 133 (1952). See Gordon, Emanuel L., “Loss of Citizenship by Continuous Residence Abroad,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 53, pp. 451–75 (April, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
29 Such was the teaching, Justice Jackson noted, of Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939).
30 District of Columbia v. John R. Thompson Co., 346 U.S. 100 (1953). See Rosenthal, Helen M., “Delegable Powers and the District of Columbia,” George Washington Law Review, Vol. 21, pp. 337–53 (Jan., 1953)Google Scholar; Indritz, Phineas, “Racial Ramparts in the Nation's Capital,” Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 297–329 (March, 1953)Google Scholar.
In Western Pacific R. Corp. v. Western Pacific R. Co., 345 U.S. 247 (1953), the Court held that Section 46(c) of Title 28 of the U. S. Code does not require each circuit judge of a Court of Appeals to consider every petition for a hearing or rehearing en banc, but that each Court may, if it wishes, delegate this responsibility to a division. The statute, adopted in 1948, was a legislative ratification of Textile Mills Securities Corp. v. Commissioner, 314 U.S. 326 (1943), which merely held that the Court of Appeals has the power to order a hearing en banc. To hold that on request the court must sit en banc to entertain a motion for an en banc hearing would impose an unwarranted burden upon it. Litigants are always free to suggest that a particular case is appropriate for consideration en banc, and of course the court itself has the power to initiate en banc proceedings sua sponte.
31 United States v. Rumely, 345 U.S. 41 (1953). See Comment, , “Limits on Congressional Inquiry,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 593–97 (Spring, 1953)Google Scholar; Liacos, Paul J., “Rights of Witnesses before Congressional Committees,” Boston University Law Review, Vol. 33, pp. 337–86 (June, 1953)Google Scholar.
32 The books in question included: John T. Flynn, The Road Ahead; Thomas J. Norton, The Constitution of the United States; Melchior Palyi, Compulsory Medical Care; Irving B. McCann, Why the Taft-Hartley Law.
33 See Note, “Supreme Court Interpretation of Statutes to Avoid Constitutional Decisions,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 53, pp. 633–51 (May, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
34 Justice Frankfurter also took comfort from the fact that in United States v. CIO, 335 U.S. 106 (1948), the Court, with a view to avoiding a serious constitutional doubt, strained words even harder.
35 344 U.S. 174 (1952). Justice Burton dissented without opinion. I believe this is the first case holding a federal statute unconstitutional since United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946). The only other decision invalidating an act of Congress since the holocaust of 1935–1936 was Tot v. United States, 319 U.S. 463 (1943). For an up-to-date list of acts of Congress held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court see Constitution of the United States, Revised and Annotated (Washington, 1953), pp. 1241–54Google Scholar.
36 Congress promptly rewrote Section 704 to authorize inspection in clear and unambiguous language, Public Law 217, Chapter 350, 83d Cong., 1st sess., approved August 7, 1953.
37 346 U.S. 1 (1953). See Sibley, Mulford Q. and Jacob, Philip E., Conscription of Conscience (Ithaca, N.Y., 1952)Google Scholar; Heisler, Francis, “The Law versus the Conscientious Objector,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 441–60 (Spring, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
38 American Trucking Associations v. United States, 344 U.S. 298 (1953).
39 Justices Black and Douglas dissented on the ground that the administrative rules were not within the terms of the statute.
40 345 U.S. 146 (1953). In King v. United States, 344 U.S. 254 (1952), the Court approved an ICC order requiring Florida railroads to charge intrastate freight rates which would reflect the same increases that had been authorized for comparable interstate traffic, although the interstate rates were increased partly to make up a deficit in passenger revenue.
41 Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 (1951).
42 Sacher v. United States, 343 U.S. 1 (1952).
43 Isserman v. Ethics Committee of the Essex County Bar Association, 345 U. S. 927 (1953). See: Weissman, David L., “Sacher and Isserman in the Courts,” Lawyers Guild Review, Vol. 12, pp. 39–47 (Winter, 1952)Google Scholar; Note, “The Imposition of Disciplinary Measures for the Misconduct of Attorneys,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 52, pp. 1039–53 (Dec., 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brown, Ralph S. Jr., and Fassett, John D., “Loyalty Tests for Admission to the Bar,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 480–508 (Spring, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
44 In re Isserman, 345 U.S. 286 (1953). The vote was 4–4, Justice Clark not participating. The explanation for the outcome, with this vote, would seem to be that under the applicable Rule of the Court a lawyer already disbarred by a state court has the “burden” of showing cause why he should not be disbarred in the Supreme Court. If the Justices are evenly divided as to whether he has shown good cause he loses, since the burden was upon him to demonstrate that he should not be disbarred.
45 344 U.S. 149 (1952).
46 The controlling precedent was United States v. Pacific R. Co., 120 U.S. 227 (1887).
47 345 U.S. 22 (1953). See Berry, R. L. and Sullivan, J. M., “The Constitutionality of Federal Taxation as an Exercise of Federal Police Power,” Notre Dame Lawyer, Vol. 28, pp. 127–36 (Fall, 1952)Google Scholar.
48 United States v. Constantine, 296 U.S. 287 (1935).
49 United States v. Sullivan, 274 U.S. 259 (1927).
50 Alstate Construction Co. v. Durkin, 345 U.S. 13 (1953). A similar decision was reached in a companion case, Thomas v. Hempt Brothers, 345 U.S. 19 (1953). Here the Court ruled that the Act covers employees of the operator of a stone quarry whose customers included the Pennsylvania Turnpike, the Pennsylvania Railroad, and an airport, all of which handle interstate traffic. The employer manufactured cement mixtures and hauled them in trucks to his customers. In United States v. Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp., 344 U.S. 218 (1952), it was decided that the offense made punishable under the Fair Labor Standard Act is a course of conduct and not individual acts.
51 345 U.S. 295 (1953).
52 Powell v. U.S. Cartridge Co., 339 U.S. 497 (1950).
53 Public Utilities Commission v. Attleboro Steam & Electric Co., 273 U.S. 83 (1927).
54 New York, New Haven & H. R. Co. v. Nothnagle, 346 U.S. 128 (1953).
55 South Buffalo Railway Co. v. Ahern, 344 U. 8. 367 (1953). For a complete analysis of FELA see: “The Federal Employers' Liability Act,” Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 18, Part I, pp. 107–255 (Spring, 1953)Google Scholar, and Part II, pp. 257–431 (Summer, 1953).
56 Pope v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., 345 U.S. 379 (1953).
57 Steele v. Bulova Watch Co., 344 U.S. 280 (1952).
58 Federal Communications Commission v. RCA Communications, 346 U.S. 86 (1953). The vote was 5–2. Justice Black dissented on the ground that the Commission's findings had substantial evidential support. Justice Douglas dissented on the ground that the record clearly supports the opposite conclusion, and that the Commission is so obviously wrong that a remand could serve no useful purpose.
59 Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United States, 345 U.S. 594 (1953). See Oppenheim, S. C., “Federal Antitrust Legislation: Guideposts to a Revised National Antitrust Policy,” Michigan Law Review, Vol. 50, pp. 1139–1244 (June, 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
60 For a first interpretation of Section 2(f) of the Robinson-Patman Act, which prohibits buyers from knowingly inducing or receiving a discrimination in price, see Automatic Canteen Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 346 U.S. 61 (1953). The Court held, with an eye to encouraging price bargaining, that the burden of proof relating to the justification of the price differential does not shift to the buyer once the Commission has shown that the buyer knew about it, largely on the theory that the buyer doesn't have information about the seller's costs. On the other hand, since the Commission is armed with investigatory and subpoena powers, it is in a better position to get the facts. Three dissenting Justices protested against what they regarded as an “enervating” reading of the statute.
61 American Newspaper Publishers Association v. NLRB, 345 U.S. 100 (1953) (reproduction by printers of “bogus sets” of advertising matter already supplied by the advertisers); NLRB v. Gamble Enterprises, Inc., 345 U.S. 117 (1953) (employment of a local orchestra by a theatre in connection with appearance of traveling bands). See Note, “Featherbedding and Taft-Hartley,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 52, pp. 1020–33 (Dec., 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
62 Federal Power Commission v. Idaho Power Company, 344 U.S. 17 (1952).
63 Public Service Commission of Utah v. Wycoff Co., 344 U.S. 176 (1952).
64 TWA v. Koppal, 345 U.S. 653 (1953).
65 Levinson v. Deupree, 345 U.S. 648 (1953).
66 339 U.S. 200.
67 344 U.S. 443 (1953).
68 See memorandum in Maryland v. Baltimore Radio Show, 338 U.S. 912 (1950).
69 The Frankfurter opinion on this issue is printed under the title Daniels v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443 (1953).
70 State Government, Vol. 26, pp. 241–45 (Oct., 1953)Google Scholar. See also the suggestions of the Attorney General of Indiana, Emmert, James A., “Use and Misuse of Habeas Corpus Writ by Prisoners,” Proceedings of the Conference of the National Association of Attorneys General (1946), pp. 53–59 Google Scholar. Consult: Rogge, O. John and Gordon, Murray A., “Habeas Corpus, Civil Rights, and the Federal System,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 509–28 (Spring, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Beverly, Melvin E., “Federal-State Conflicts in the Field of Habeas Corpus,” California Law Review, Vol. 41, pp. 483–98 (Fall, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
71 While a majority of the Court agreed that it was error for the lower federal courts in the Brown v. Allen litigation to give weight to the previous denial of certiorari, a majority of six also held that on the facts it was not reversible error. On this point see Justice Black's dissenting opinion at 344 U.S. 548–50, and Justice Frankfurter's at 344 U.S. 554–60.
72 344 U.S. 86 (1952).
73 175 F. 2d 250 (3d Cir. 1949), reversed, 338 U.S. 864 (1949).
74 321 U.S. 114 (1944).
75 345 U.S. 242 (1953). See Note, “Power to Decline the Exercise of Federal Jurisdiction,” Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 37, pp. 46–64 (Dec., 1952)Google Scholar.
76 344 U.S. 357 (1953). See Mishkin, Paul J., “The Federal ‘Question’ in the District Courts,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 53, pp. 157–96 (Feb., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
77 In Dixon v. Duffy, 344 U.S. 143 (1952), a state judgment was vacated and the case remanded in order to give the Supreme Court of California a chance to determine officially whether or not the judgment rested on an adequate state ground.
78 U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1257.
79 Montgomery Building & Construction Trades Council v. Ledbetter Erection Co., 344 U.S. 178 (1952).
80 346 U.S. 137 (1953). Cf. Hiatt v. Brown, 339 U.S. 105 (1950). See the symposium on military justice in Vanderbilt Law Review, Vol. 6, pp. 161–365 (Feb., 1953)Google Scholar, and particularly James Snedeker's article, “Habeas Corpus and Court-Martial Prisoners”; Snedeker, James, Military Justice and the Uniform Code (Boston, 1953)Google Scholar; Mullally, Mandeville Jr.,“Military Justice: The Uniform Code in Action,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 53, pp. 1–27 (Jan., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hart, Henry M. Jr., “The Power of Congress to Limit the Jurisdiction of Federal Courts,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 1362–1402 (June, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
81 McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943).
82 345 U.S. 83 (1953). See Note, “Habeas Corpus and Judicial Review of Draft Classifications,” Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 244–56 (Winter, 1953)Google Scholar; tenBroek, Jacobus, “Wartime Power of the Military over Citizen Civilians within the Country,” California Law Review, Vol. 41, pp. 167–208 (Summer, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
83 New Jersey v. New York, 345 U.S. 369 (1953). Two Justices dissented on the ground that the claim of Philadelphia to becoming a party was as good as that of New York City, which was already a party.
84 Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571 (1953).
85 Ramspeck v. Federal Trial Examiners Conference, 345 U.S. 128 (1953). See Note, “The Status of the Trial Examiner in Administrative Agencies,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 1065–81 (April, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tucker, Simon, “The Administrative Law of Federal Hearing Examiner Personnel,” George Washington Law Review, Vol. 21, pp. 38–60, 198–240 (Oct., Dec., 1952)Google Scholar; Musolf, Lloyd D., Federal Examiners and the Conflict of Law and Administration (Baltimore, 1953)Google Scholar.
86 In United States v. L. A. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc., 344 U.S. 33 (1952), the Court held that an objection to an ICC hearing on the ground that the examiner had not been appointed pursuant to Section 11 of the Administrative Procedure Act must first be made before the agency itself, and that it is too late to make it for the first time in a reviewing court.
87 See Chafee, Zechariah Jr., How Human Rights Got into the Constitution (Boston, 1952)Google Scholar; American Jewish Congress and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Civil Rights in the United States: 1952 (New York, 1953)Google Scholar; American Civil Liberties Union, Freedom, Justice, Equality: Report on Civil Liberties, January 1951–June 1953 (New York, 1953)Google Scholar; O'Brian, John Lord, “New Encroachments on Individual Freedom,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 1–27 (Nov., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nixon, Charles R., “Freedom vs. Unity: A Problem in the Theory of Civil Liberty,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 68, pp. 70–88 (March, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Graham, Howard Jay, “Procedure to Substance—Extra-Judicial Rise of Due Process, 1830–1860.” California Law Review, Vol. 40, pp. 483–500 (Winter, 1952–1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Poole, Kenneth A., “Statutory Remedies for the Protection of Civil Rights,” Oregon Law Review, Vol. 32, pp. 210–53 (April 1953)Google Scholar; Riggs, Marion S., “The Existence of Civil Rights at Common Law,” South Carolina Law Quarterly, Vol. 5, pp. 449–57 (March, 1953)Google Scholar; Note, “The Proper Scope of the Civil Rights Acts,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 1285–1300 (May, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
88 344 U.S. 183 (1952). See The States and Subversion, ed. Gellhorn, Walter (Ithaca, 1952)Google Scholar; Note, “Effectiveness of State Anti-Subversive Legislation,” Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 492–520 (Summer, 1953)Google Scholar; Note, “State Control of Subversion: A Problem in Federalism,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 66, pp. 327–34 (Dec., 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Byse, Clark, “A Report on the Pennsylvania Loyalty Act,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 101, pp. 1–29 (Jan., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bontecou, Eleanor, The Federal Loyalty-Security Program (Ithaca, 1953)Google Scholar; Gardner, George K., “Bailey v. Richardson and the Constitution of the United States,” Boston University Law Review, Vol. 33, pp. 177–203 (April, 1953)Google Scholar; Brown, Ralph S. Jr., and Fassett, John D., “Security Tests for Maritime Workers: Due Process under the Port Security Program,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 62, pp. 1163–1208 (July, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Comment, , “Loyalty and Private Employment,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 62, pp. 954–84 (May, 1953)Google Scholar; National Industrial Conference Board, Industrial Security: Combating Subversion and Sabotage (1952)Google Scholar.
89 Garner v. Board of Public Works, 341 U.S. 716 (1951); Adler v. Board of Education, 342 U.S. 485 (1952); Gerende v. Board of Supervisors, 341 U.S. 56 (1951).
90 345 U.S. 395 (1953). On free speech issues see: Cross, Harold L., The People's Right to Know (New York, 1953)Google Scholar; Meiklejohn, Alexander, “What Does the First Amendment Mean?,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 461–79 (Spring, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ernst, Morris L. and Katz, Arthur J., “Speech: Public and Private,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 53, pp. 620–31 (May, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kittleson, Henry M. and Smith, J. Allen, “Free Speech (1949–1952): Slogans v. States' Rights,” University of Florida Law Review, Vol. 5, pp. 227–60 (Fall, 1952)Google Scholar; Abernathy, Glenn, “Assemblies in the Public Streets,” South Carolina Law Quarterly, Vol. 5, pp. 384–416 (March, 1953)Google Scholar; Note, “Obscenity—Construction and Constitutionality of Statutes Regulating Obscene Literature,” New York University Law Review, Vol. 28, pp. 877–90 (April, 1953)Google Scholar.
91 312 U.S. 569 (1941).
92 Local Union No. 10, A. F. of L. v. Graham, 345 U.S. 192 (1953).
93 345 U.S. 67 (1953). See Pfeffer, Leo, Church, State and Freedom (Boston, 1953)Google Scholar; Katz, Wilber G., “Freedom of Religion and State Neutrality,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 426–40 (Spring, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pfeffer, Leo and O'Neill, James M., debating “The Meaning of the Establishment Clause,” Buffalo Law Review, Vol. 2, pp. 225–79 (Spring, 1953)Google Scholar; Reed, George E., “Church-State and the Zorach Case,” Notre Dame Lawyer, Vol. 27, pp. 529–51 (Summer, 1952)Google Scholar; Harpster, James E., “Religion, Education and the Law,” Marquette Law Review, Vol. 36, pp. 24–66 (Summer, 1952)Google Scholar; Boyer, William W. Jr., “Religious Education of Public School Pupils in Wisconsin,” Wisconsin Law Review, Vol. 1953, pp. 181–255 (March, 1953)Google Scholar, “Property Rights of Religious Institutions in Wisconsin,” Marquette Law Review, Vol. 36, pp. 329–70 (Spring, 1953)Google Scholar, “Religion and the Police Power in Wisconsin,” Marquette Law Review, Vol. 37, pp. 1–34 (Summer, 1953)Google Scholar.
94 Justice Frankfurter concurred except insofar as the opinion was based on the First Amendment. He thought the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was controlling.
95 Kedroff v. St. Nicholas Cathedral of Russian Orthodox Church, 344 U.S. 94 (1952). See the astute remarks of Howe, Mark De Wolfe, “Political Theory and the Nature of Liberty,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. 67, pp. 91–95 (Nov., 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
96 Just whose freedom was prohibited was not made clear. The Fourteenth Amendment speaks only of the rights of “persons.”
97 13 Wall. 679 (1871).
98 Justice Reed also held that New York's legislative application of cy-pres doctrine to this trust did not avoid the constitutional objection. It was explained that Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1 (1890), upon which reliance was had, dealt with a seizure of property based on the general rule that where a charitable corporation is dissolved as unlawful, the sovereign distributes the property, according to the cy-pres doctrine, to objects of charity and usefulness. In Kedroff there was no such dissolution or seizure.
99 346 U.S. 156 (1953). See Allen, Francis A., “Due Process and State Criminal Procedures: Another Look,” Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 48, pp. 16–35 (March–April, 1953)Google Scholar; Matherne, Marne S., “Pretrial Confessions—A New Rule,” Tennessee Law Review, Vol. 22, pp. 1011–24 (June, 1953)Google Scholar; Hall, Jerome, “Police and Law in a Democratic Society,” Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 133–77 (Winter, 1953)Google Scholar; Marx, Emily, “Psychosomatics and Coerced Confessions,” Dickinson Law Review, Vol. 57, pp. 1–23 (Oct., 1952)Google Scholar. On various aspects of the self-incrimination problem see: Fraenkel, Osmond K., “The Fourth Amendment and the Federal Courts,” Lawyers Guild Review, Vol. 12, pp. 73–77 (Spring, 1952)Google Scholar; Boudin, Louis B., “The Constitutional Privilege in Operation,” Lawyers Guild Review, Vol. 12, pp. 128–49 (Summer, 1952)Google Scholar; Murray, John M., “The Privilege against Self-incrimination versus Immunity: Proposed Statutes,” Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 511–24 (May, 1953)Google Scholar; Smith, James B., “The Privilege of Silence and the Legislative Process,” Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 330–62 (March, 1953)Google Scholar; Westin, Alan F., “Do Silent Witnesses Defend Civil Liberties?,” Commentary, Vol. 15, pp. 537–46 (June, 1953)Google Scholar; Frantz, Laurent B. and Redlich, Norman, “Does Silence Mean Guilt?,” The Nation, Vol. 176, pp. 471–77 (June 6, 1953)Google Scholar.
100 344 U.S. 443 (1953).
101 U.S. ex rel. Smith v. Baldi, 344 U.S. 561 (1953).
102 344 U.S. 443 (1953).
103 Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937).
104 344 U.S. 424 (1953).
105 Justice Minton cited Wade v. Hunter, 336 U.S. 684 (1949) and Thompson v. United States, 155 U.S. 271 (1894).
106 344 U.S. 199 (1952). See Comment, , “Admissibility in a State Court of Evidence Obtained by Wire-Tapping,” Missouri Law Review, Vol. 18, pp. 185–91 (April, 1953)Google Scholar.
107 “… No person not being authorized by the sender shall intercept any communication and divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect, or meaning of such intercepted communication to any person….”
108 Nardone v. United States, 302 U.S. 379 (1937).
109 Weiss v. United States, 308 U.S. 321 (1939).
110 338 U.S. 25 (1949).
111 Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914).
112 Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948).
113 346 U.S. 249 (1953). The case came up from California, which had ruled that the suit was forbidden by the Shelley case. The Supreme Court of Michigan and the District Court of the District of Columbia had taken the same position. The Supreme Courts of Missouri and Oklahoma had ruled the other way.
114 See Note, “‘Standing’ to Attack the Constitutionality of a Statute,” New York University Law Review, Vol. 27, pp. 656–70 (Oct., 1952)Google Scholar.
115 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 345 U.S. 972 (1953). See: Frank, John P., “Can Courts Erase the Color Line?,” Buffalo Law Review, Vol. 2, pp. 28–44 (Winter, 1952)Google Scholar; Maslow, Will and Robison, Joseph B., “Civil Rights Legislation and the Fight for Equality, 1862–1952,” University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 20, pp. 363–413 (Spring, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Leland, Wilfred C. Jr., “We Believe in Employment on Merit, But …,” Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 37, pp. 246–67 (March, 1953)Google Scholar.
116 345 U.S. 559 (1953).
117 344 U.S. 443 (1953).
118 Smith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649 (1944).
119 Rice v. Elmore, 165 F. 2d 387 (4th Cir. 1947), certiorari denied, 333 U.S. 875 (1948); Baskin v. Brown, 174 F. 2d 391 (4th Cir. 1949).
120 Davis v. Schnell, 81 F. Supp. 872 (S. D. Ala. 1949), affirmed, per curiam, without opinion and without argument, 336 U.S. 933 (1949).
121 345 U.S. 461 (1953). See Ewing, Cortez A. M., Primary Elections in the Soulh (Norman, Oklahoma, 1953)Google Scholar.
122 344 U.S. 157 (1952).
123 267 U.S. 307 (1925).
124 344 U.S. 583 (1953). See Note, “State Taxation of Vehicles Moving Interstate,” Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 212–30 (Winter, 1953)Google Scholar.
125 344 U.S. 574 (1953).
126 Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Minnesota, 322 U.S. 292 (1944). Also relied upon was People ex rel. N.Y. Central & H.R.R. Co. v. Miller, 202 U.S. 584 (1906).
127 Esso Standard Oil v. Evans, 345 U.S. 495 (1953).
128 United States v. Allegheny County, 322 U.S. 174 (1944) was distinguished on the ground that there the state applied an ad valorem property tax to government-owned machinery leased to a private company; thus the value of the federal property was in part the measure of the tax.
129 James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. 134 (1937).
130 344 U.S. 624 (1953).
131 345 U.S. 322 (1953).
132 United States v. Gilbert Associates, 345 U.S. 361 (1953).
133 345 U.S. 528 (1953).
134 345 U.S. 514 (1953).
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.