http://www.oyez.org/cases/1955/podcast U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en The Oyez Project at Chicago-Kent /cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_701_2/reargument-1 While residing at an airbase in England as a military dependent, Mrs. Clarice Covert was tried and convicted by court-martial for the murder of her husband, a sergeant in the United States Air Force. Mrs. Covert was not a member of the armed forces. Her trial and subsequent conviction by court martial in the United States was authorized under Article 2(11) of the United States Code of Military Justice. Mrs. Covert filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court alleging that her conviction by military authorities had violated her constitutional rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. The district court, holding that “a civilian is entitled to a civilian trial,” granted her petition. The Government appealed directly to the United States Supreme Court. In its initial decision of the case (351 U.S. 487), the Court held that Mrs. Covert’s military trial was constitutional, that the Constitutional right to a trial by jury did not apply to American citizens tried in foreign lands. Congress, the Court held, could provide for trial by any means it saw fit so long as such means were reasonable and consistent with due process. Justice Felix Frankfurter issued a lengthy reservation, and Chief Justice Earl Warren together with Justices Hugo L. Black and William O. Douglas issued a strong dissent. The Court subsequently granted a petition for rehearing. Thu, 03 May 1956 13:00:00 +0000 85380 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_701_2/reargument-2 While residing at an airbase in England as a military dependent, Mrs. Clarice Covert was tried and convicted by court-martial for the murder of her husband, a sergeant in the United States Air Force. Mrs. Covert was not a member of the armed forces. Her trial and subsequent conviction by court martial in the United States was authorized under Article 2(11) of the United States Code of Military Justice. Mrs. Covert filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court alleging that her conviction by military authorities had violated her constitutional rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. The district court, holding that “a civilian is entitled to a civilian trial,” granted her petition. The Government appealed directly to the United States Supreme Court. In its initial decision of the case (351 U.S. 487), the Court held that Mrs. Covert’s military trial was constitutional, that the Constitutional right to a trial by jury did not apply to American citizens tried in foreign lands. Congress, the Court held, could provide for trial by any means it saw fit so long as such means were reasonable and consistent with due process. Justice Felix Frankfurter issued a lengthy reservation, and Chief Justice Earl Warren together with Justices Hugo L. Black and William O. Douglas issued a strong dissent. The Court subsequently granted a petition for rehearing. Thu, 03 May 1956 13:00:00 +0000 85381 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_442/argument The Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") fired Kendrick Cole when it determined that his employment was not "clearly consistent with the interests of national security." Mr. Cole was a food and drug inspector and a "preference-eligible veteran," but was charged with having "a close association with individuals reliably reported to be Communists." Mr. Cole appealed his discharge to the Civil Service Commission, which denied his appeal, finding that the Veterans' Preference Act did not afford Mr. Cole a right of appeal under the circumstances. Mr. Cole brought an action seeking declaratory judgment in the District of Columbia federal district court alleging that his discharge was invalid and that the Civil Service Commission improperly denied his appeal. The district court dismissed the case and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed. Tue, 06 Mar 1956 13:00:00 +0000 jgoldman 63910 at http://www.oyez.org /cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_1/reargument None Tue, 24 Jan 1956 13:00:00 +0000 84856 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_10/argument-2 Nelson, a member of the Communist Party, was convicted of violating the Pennsylvania Sedition Act. This Act was implemented prior to Congress's adoption of the Smith Act of 1940 (amended in 1948) which prohibited the same conduct as Pennsylvania's law. Tue, 15 Nov 1955 13:00:00 +0000 53540 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_10/argument-3 Nelson, a member of the Communist Party, was convicted of violating the Pennsylvania Sedition Act. This Act was implemented prior to Congress's adoption of the Smith Act of 1940 (amended in 1948) which prohibited the same conduct as Pennsylvania's law. Tue, 15 Nov 1955 13:00:00 +0000 86698 at http://www.oyez.org http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1955/1955_10/argument-1 Nelson, a member of the Communist Party, was convicted of violating the Pennsylvania Sedition Act. This Act was implemented prior to Congress's adoption of the Smith Act of 1940 (amended in 1948) which prohibited the same conduct as Pennsylvania's law. Tue, 15 Nov 1955 13:00:00 +0000 53539 at http://www.oyez.org