Cases - 1945 term

Marsh v. Alabama

Thu, 06 Dec 1945 13:00:00 +0000

Location

US Post Office

120 North Craft Highway Chickasaw AL 36611

Chickasaw, AL 36611

United States

30° 45' 43.38" N, 88° 4' 26.6772" W

See map: Google Maps

Case Basics

Docket No.

114

Appellant

Grace Marsh

Petitioner Type

Appellant

Appellee

State of Alabama

Respondent Type

Appellee

Heard By

Stone Court (1945-1946)

Decided By

Stone Court (1943-1945)

Opinion

326 U.S. 501 (1945)

Argued

Thursday, December 6, 1945

Decided

Sunday, January 7, 1945

Advocates

Hayden C. Covington (argued the cause for the appellant)

William N. McQueen (Attorney General of Alabama, argued the cause for the appellee)

Facts of the Case

Grace Marsh, a Jehovah's Witness, attempted to distribute religious literature on the sidewalk near a post office in Chickasaw, Alabama. The town of Chickasaw is owned and run by the Gulf Shipbuilding Corporation and is not a public municipality. Despite this, the town exhibits most of the same characteristics as any other town. After being informed that she was on private property and told to stop distribution of her religious material, Marsh refused. She was arrested, tried, and convicted of trepass.

Question

Did Alabama violate Marsh's rights under the First and Fourteenth amendments by refusing to allow her to distribute religious material in the privately owned town of Chickasaw?

Conclusion

Yes. In an opinion by Justice Hugo L. Black, the Court found, 5 to 3, that there was no significant difference between the relationship between Chickasaw and private citizens and the relationship between any other town and its citizens. As such, it employed a balancing test, weighing private property rights against an individual's right to free speech. Favoring the latter, the Court ruled in Marsh's favor.

Colegrove v. Green

Thu, 07 Mar 1946 13:00:00 +0000

Location

Illinois General Assembly

S 2nd Street and E Capitol Avenue Springfield IL 62701

Springfield, IL 62701

United States

39° 47' 53.9124" N, 89° 38' 52.638" W

See map: Google Maps

Case Basics

Docket No.

804

Petitioner

Colegrove

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Green

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Stone Court (1945-1946)

Decided By

Stone Court (1946)

Opinion

328 U.S. 549 (1946)

Argued

Thursday, March 7, 1946

Decided

Monday, June 10, 1946

Facts of the Case

Kenneth W. Colegrove, a citizen of Illinois and a Northwestern University political scientist, brought suit against Illinois officials to enjoin them from holding an upcoming election. Colegrove argued that the congressional districts "lacked compactness of territory and approximate equality of population."

Question

Did the Illinois congressional districts unconstitutionally violate principles of fair apportionment?

Conclusion

The Court held that the Illinois districts were constitutional, largely because existing laws imposed no requirements "as to the compactness, contiguity and equality in population of districts." In a plurality opinion, Frankfurter declined to involve the Court in the districting process, arguing that the political nature of apportionment precluded judicial intervention. "The remedy for unfairness in districting is to secure State legislatures that will apportion properly, or to invoke the ample powers of Congress."

United States v. Causby

jgoldman — Wed, 01 May 1946 13:00:00 +0000

Location

Farm outside Greensboro, NC

U.S. Route 421 Greensboro NC 27409

Greensboro, NC 27409

United States

36° 4' 58.44" N, 79° 57' 23.4" W

See map: Google Maps

Case Basics

Docket No.

630

Petitioner

United States

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Thomas Lee Causby et al.

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Stone Court (1946)

Decided By

Stone Court (1946)

Opinion

328 U.S. 256 (1946)

Argued

Wednesday, May 1, 1946

Decided

Monday, May 27, 1946

Advocates

Walter J. Cummings Jr. (argued the cause for the United States)

William E. Comer (argued the cause for the respondents)

Facts of the Case

Thomas Lee Causby owned a chicken farm outside of Greensboro, North Carolina. The farm was located near an airport used regularly by the United States military. According to Causby, noise from the airport regularly frightened the animals on his farm, resulting in the deaths of several chickens. The problem became so severe that Causby was forced to abandon his business. Under an ancient doctrine of the common law, land ownership extended to the space above and below the earth. Using this doctrine as a basis, Causby sued the United States, arguing that he owned the airspace above his farm. By flying planes in this airspace, he argued, the government had confiscated his property without compensation, thus violating the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The United States Court of Claims accepted Causby's argument, and ordered the government to pay compensation.

Question

Did the flying of planes by the United States military over Causby's farm constitute a violation of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment?

Conclusion

Yes, to an extent. In a 5-2 opinion authored by Justice William O. Douglas, the Court concluded that the ancient common law doctrine "has no place in the modern world." Justice Douglas noted that, were the Court to accept the doctrine as valid, "every transcontinental flight would subject the operator to countless trespass suits. Common sense revolts at the idea." However, while the Court rejected the unlimited reach above and below the earth described in the common law doctrine, it also ruled that, "if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere." Without defining a specific limit, the Court stated that flights over the land could be considered a violation of the Takings Clause if they led to "a direct and immediate interference with the enjoyment and use of the land." Given the damage caused by the particularly low, frequent flights over his farm, the Court determined that the government had violated Causby's rights, and he was entitled to compensation. (Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone died on April 22; Justice Robert H. Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision in the case, leaving the court with 7 members.)