The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Today in Supreme Court History: May 9, 1974
5/9/1974: Resolution to impeach President Nixon introduced in the House of Representatives. On 7/24/1974, the Supreme Court would decide U.S. v. Nixon.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Andersen v. United States, 170 U.S. 481 (decided May 9, 1898): Upholding conviction of sailor for shooting crewmember and pushing him overboard. Technical defects in indictment (unclear whether homicide alleged to be caused by shooting or drowning, does not mention location) held harmless error.
Bell v. United States, 349 U.S. 81 (decided May 9, 1955): sentence for Mann Act offense should not be doubled for transporting two women instead of one, due to ambiguity in statute
Havnor v. New York, 170 U.S. 408 (decided May 9, 1898): Court could not review conviction under New York law (for practicing “barbering” on Sunday) because Writ of Error was signed by an Associate Judge of New York’s highest court instead of the Chief Judge as was required by federal jurisdictional statute.
Gacy v. Page, 511 U.S. 1079 (decided May 9, 1994): denying stay of execution of John Wayne Gacy; dissent by Blackmun restating belief that death penalty is always unconstitutional
Rice v. Sioux City Memorial Park Cemetery, 349 U.S. 70 (decided May 9, 1955): Earlier grant of certiorari, and decision on the merits, 348 U.S. 880 (1954) (as to mental distress to widow due to refusal to bury husband in Native American cemetery) vacated because Court belatedly alerted to existing statute which mooted the issue presented. We’re not told more about this, but note the Court’s casual handwave as to the carelessness of both itself and the attorneys: “Though the statute was in existence at the time the case first came here, it was then not seen in proper focus because it was blanketed by the issues of state action and constitutional power for which our interest was enlisted.” IOW, the lazy attorney’s “I didn’t focus in on that” excuse.
United States ex rel. Johnson v. Shaughnessy, 336 U.S. 806 (decided May 9, 1949): order denying admission of immigrant as “mental defective” vacated and remanded because medical appeal board did not conduct its own examination as required by regulation.
unclear whether homicide alleged to be caused by shooting or drowning
I wish we had a transcript of oral argument on this one. Can you imagine how a modern court would react to "the state can't convict my client because it can't prove if it was the shooting the guy or the throwing the guy overboard that caused the death"?
Blackmun (another of that Legal Mastermind Richard Milhouse's great Surpreme picks) who wrote the opinion killing millions of unborn babies thought executing John Wayne Gacy was "always Unconstitutional", Jeezo-Beezo, almost wish that Hell wasn't a made up place to scare children.
Frank
A Noble Prize for Achievement in Identifying Error in Today in Supreme Court History was awarded to Seamus a few years ago with respect to the May 9 installment.
As is customary, Profs. Barnett and Blackman revised their "scholarship" without acknowledging the error, the publication of the revision, or Seamus' pointer.
Carry on, "scholars."