Today in Supreme Court History: February 9, 1937

2/9/1937: NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. argued.

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

United States v. Lane Motor Co., 344 U.S. 630 (decided February 9, 1953): truck used solely to commute to illegal distillery is not "property intended for use in violating alcohol tax laws" and hence can't be seized and forfeited by the IRS

Musser v. Utah, 333 U.S. 95 (decided February 9, 1948): Utah statute prohibited conduct "injurious to public morals". Appeal from conviction for counseling people to enter into polygamous relationships (this is Utah -- ha). The Court notes that the statute is vague but in context of other Utah statutes refers matter back to Utah Supreme Court. Dissent by Rutledge notes First Amendment concerns. The Utah Supreme Court agreed that it was vague under the Fourteenth Amendment and vacated the conviction, 118 Utah 537. But! the defendant, Joseph White Musser, was an out-and-out polygamist who published a magazine called "Truth". Shown the magazine, Rulon Jeffs joined the cult. At age 85 he coerced Rebecca Wall, age 19, to be his 19th wife. She eventually broke free and publicized her plight. She married Jeffs's grandson Ben Musser, who one assumes was related somehow to the defendant in this case; their family tree was more like a suffocating tangle of mangroves.

CBS, Inc. v. Davis, 510 U.S. 1315 (decided February 9, 1994): Meat packing employee agreed to wear hidden camera. CBS was about to broadcast an exposé. Alleging trespass and breach of duty by employee, company (Federal Beef Processors) sued to stop broadcast. The Court here dissolves injunction against broadcast, citing First Amendment and previous law on prior restraint. (The exposé, a 2-minute segment of the show "48 Hours", aired on April 21, 1994. Not known if it included an interview with Nathan Thurm, Federal Beef's attorney.)

Kwong Hai Chew v. Colding, 344 U.S. 590 (decided February 9, 1953): can't deny without a hearing re-entry of permanent resident alien member of United States merchant sailing on United States registered vessel; resident aliens are entitled to due process (not shown why they wanted to exclude him; one has to go to the District Court opinion which says only that it was on the basis of "information of a confidential nature"; however years later documents obtained via FOIA show that he was active in Chinese politics and (impermissibly?) critical of our ally Taiwan, see https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=462500; they also show that this litigation dragged on to 1967 when he was finally naturalized)

Lutwak v. United States, 344 U.S. 604 (decided February 9, 1953): conviction for conspiracy to misuse War Brides Act (defendants arranged veterans to get married in Paris just so that wives could enter the U.S.) upheld; last date of conspiracy was date last bride entered the U.S. and later declaration against co-conspirators improperly admitted was harmless error ("this record fairly shrieks the guilt of the parties . . . a defendant is entitled to a fair trial but not a perfect one")

[Dilan Esper]

And obviously Warren Jeffs, one of the descendants of the Jeffs clan, became the head of the FLDS Church and eventually got sentenced to prison for child molestation after he recorded himself having sex with his teenage "bride".

[Dilan Esper]

Also, the Kwong Hai Chew case was relevant in 2017 when Trump's first iteration of his "Muslim Ban" purported to bar permanent residents from reentry. This was very swiftly found impermissible and quickly dropped even by Trump. Green card holders have vested legal rights.

[Dan Schiavetta]

thanks as always for this extra information

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Lutwak v. United States...arranged marriages, or something more sinister?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Arranged marriages are perfectly legal. At least they are in the Catholic Church.

[Dr. Ed 2]

"(not shown why they wanted to exclude him; one has to go to the District Court opinion which says only that it was on the basis of “information of a confidential nature”; however years later documents obtained via FOIA show that he was active in Chinese politics and (impermissibly?) critical of our ally Taiwan"

1953? He was a Communist....

[Dan Schiavetta]

If he was, that would have been an automatic reason for keeping him out, and no reason not to say that in the decision. But he evidently wasn't.

[Mr. Bumble]

Ever determine the cause of your problem posting, yesterday?

[Dan Schiavetta]

No.

For some reason it did not want me to post the first line of my summary, which was (and it just failed to post it again, so I will try it now with spaces added, let’s see if this works):

C . J . Hendry Co . v . Moore , 318 U.S. 1 3 3 ( decided February 8, 1943 ) : Calif o rnia co urts co uld a ffirm sei zure of “pur se net” (a bsurdly

[Dan Schiavetta]

As you can see, it posted it this time.

Thanks for asking.

This happened once before, some months ago.

[Dilan Esper]

I think it is because you exceeded your daily tweet limit yesterday.

[Dan Schiavetta]

ha

I did sign up for twitter a few years ago but I've never looked at it. Life is too short.

[wolfefan]

Kudos for Nathan Thurm!

[Dan Schiavetta]

“Defensive” to the hundredth power!