Facts of the Case

Provided by Oyez

Eugene Robel, a member of the Communist Party, was charged with violating the Subversive Activities Control Act when he remained an employee at the Todd Pacific Shipyards. Under the Act, it was illegal for a member of the Party to remain employed at a location that the Secretary of Defense names as a “defense facility”. The district court dismissed the indictment because it did not allege that Robel was an active member of the Communist Party. The district court felt that this provision of the Act violated the First Amendment right to association if it applied to inactive Party members. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified the case for direct appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Questions

  1. Does the Act’s bar on Communist Party member employment in a “defense facility” violate the First Amendment right of association?

Conclusions

  1. Yes. In a 6-2 decision, Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority holding that the “defense facility” employment provision was an unconstitutional abridgment of the right of association even if it applied only to active Party members. The Supreme Court held that the provision was overbroad and the war power does not give Congress a blank slate to do whatever it wants. Justice William J. Brennan concurred in the judgment, writing that Congress’ delegation of authority in designating defense facilities to the Secretary of Defense was unconstitutional because they provided no meaningful standards for the Secretary to follow.

    Justice Byron R. White wrote a dissent, stating that the Communist Party’s goal of government overthrow justified the ban on employment in defense facilities. Justice John M. Harlan joined in the dissent. Justice Thurgood Marshall did not participate.