Yates v. United States

Media Items
Yates v. United States - Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Robert W. Kenny (Argued the cause for the petitioner in Schneiderman v. United States)
Ben Margolis (Argued the cause for the petitioners in Yates v. United States)
Philip R. Monahan (Argued the cause for the United States)
Augustin Donovan (Argued the cause for the petitioners in Richmond v. United States)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
6
Petitioner: 
Yates
Respondent: 
United States
Consolidation: 
Schneiderman v. United States, No. 7
Richmond v. United States, No. 8
Decided By: 
Warren Court (1957-1958)
Opinion: 
354 U.S. 298 (1957)
Argued: 
October 8-9, 1956
Categories: 
freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, criminal, first amendment
Location No location information present.

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Yates v. United States , 354 U.S. 298 (1957)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1956/1956_6)
Facts of the Case: 

Fourteen leaders of the Communist Party in the state of California were tried and convicted under the Smith Act. That Act prohibited willfully and knowingly conspiring to teach and advocate the overthrow of the government by force. This case was decided in conjunction with Richmond v. United States and Schneiderman v. United States.

Question: 

Did the Smith Act violate the First Amendment?

Conclusion: 

In a 6-to-1 decision, the Court reversed the convictions and remanded the cases to a District Court for retrial. The Court interpreted the Smith Act in the following manner: First, the term "organize" was construed to mean the creation of a new organization, making the Act inapplicable to subsequent organizational acts. Second, the Court drew a distinction between the "advocacy and teaching of forcible overthrow as an abstract principle" and the "advocacy and teaching of concrete action for the forcible overthrow of the Government." The Court recognized that instances of speech that amounted to "advocacy of action" were "few and far between."

Decisions

Decision: 6 votes for Yates, 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Smith, Subversive Activities Control, Communist Control, or other similar federal legislation except the Internal Security Act (qv.)

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Warren
Wrote a special concurrence
Black
Voted with the majority
Frankfurter
Voted with the majority, joined Black's concurrence
Douglas
Wrote a regular concurrence
Burton
Wrote a dissent
Clark
Wrote the majority opinion
Harlan
Did not participate
Brennan
Did not participate
Whittaker

Full Opinion by Justice John M. Harlan

Split Vote

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Warren
Wrote a special concurrence
Black
Voted with the majority
Frankfurter
Voted with the majority, joined Black's concurrence
Douglas
Wrote a dissent
Burton
Wrote a dissent
Clark
Wrote the majority opinion
Harlan
Did not participate
Brennan
Did not participate
Whittaker

Split Vote

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Warren
Wrote a dissent
Black
Voted with the majority
Frankfurter
Voted with the minority, joined Black's dissent
Douglas
Wrote a regular concurrence
Burton
Wrote a special concurrence
Clark
Wrote the majority opinion
Harlan
Did not participate
Brennan
Did not participate
Whittaker

Timeplots Affiliate

Timeplots.com: A Visual History of the Supreme Court