Public Workers v. Mitchell
| United Public Workers v. Mitchell | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued December 3, 1945 Reargued October 17, 1946 Decided February 10, 1947 |
|
| Full case name | United Public Workers of America (C.I.O.), et al. v. Mitchell, et al. |
| Citations | 330 U.S. 75 (more)
67 S. Ct. 556; 91 L. Ed. 754
|
| Prior history | On appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia |
| Holding | |
| Hatch Act of 1939, as amended in 1940, does not violate First, Fifth, Ninth, or Tenth amendments to U.S. Constitution | |
| Court membership | |
|
|
| Case opinions | |
| Plurality | Reed, joined by Vinson, Burton |
| Concurrence | Frankfurter |
| Concur/dissent | Douglas |
| Dissent | Black |
| Dissent | Rutledge |
| Murphy, Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75 (1947), is a 4-to-3 ruling by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Hatch Act of 1939, as amended in 1940, does not violate the First, Fifth, Ninth, or Tenth amendments to U.S. Constitution.
At the start of the 20th century, several unions (such as the National Federation of Federal Employees, American Federation of Government Employees, and the United Federal Workers of America) began representing employees working for the federal government of the United States. The leadership of the United Federal Workers of America (UFWA) was leftist. The leadership was militant in its advocacy of the rights of its members and most of the national and local union leadership advocated leftist ideals; associated with left-wing intellectuals, activists, and political people; and supported left-wing organizations. This led many politicians and others to believe the organization was Communist-controlled.
The political leanings of the UWFA led to passage of two pieces of legislation intended to restrict its political activities. In June 1938, Congress passed a rider to appropriations legislation which prevented the federal government from making payments (such as salaries) to any person or organization which advocated the overthrow of the federal government (as many communist organizations at the time proposed). In 1939, Congress passed the Hatch Act of 1939, which restricted political campaign activities by federal employees. A provision of the Hatch Act made it illegal for the federal government to employ anyone who advocated the overthrow of the federal government. The UFWA immediately hired lawyer Lee Pressman to challenge the constitutionality of the Hatch Act. Various individual employees of the federal government, some of whom were members of the United Public Workers of America, sought an injunction against the second sentence of §9(a) of the Hatch Act, and a declaration that the Act was unconstitutional.
...
Wikipedia