The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Wednesday, January 22, 1975
Decision: Tuesday, May 27, 1975
Issues: First Amendment, Legislative Investigations

Advocates

Jeremiah S. Gutman (Argued the cause for the respondents)
Herbert J. Miller, Jr. (Argued the cause for the petitioners)
Nancy Stearns (Argued the cause for the respondents)

Facts of the Case

In an effort to investigate the "administration, operation, and enforcement" of the Internal Security Act of 1950, the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security subpoenaed a bank for the financial records of the United States Servicemen's Fund. This nonprofit organization had actively published newsletters and sponsored coffeehouses in which discussions critical of the Vietnam War took place. The Fund challenged the subpoena arguing that its enforcement would violate the organization's First Amendment rights since the bank records contained information about the Fund's membership.

Question

Did the actions of the Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security fall within the sphere of legitimate legislative activity and not violate the First Amendment?

Conclusion

The Court held that the Senate Subcommittee's actions were legitimate and did not violate the Fund's First Amendment rights. Chief Justice Burger argued that the power to investigate, even through a compulsory mechanism like a subpoena, is "inherent in the power to make laws." Furthermore, the investigation was related to and aided in furthering a "legitimate task of Congress," namely, the investigation of the Internal Security Act. Burger disregarded the Fund's claim that the investigation was being conducted to expose its beliefs, many of which were "unorthodox or unpopular." He reasoned that the legitimacy of a congressional investigatory action is not derived from the motives of the members or by the information that the investigation uncovers.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Ideology)

Sort by Seniority
(More information here)
Decision: 8 votes for Eastland, 1 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Article 1, Section 6, Paragraph 1: Speech or Debate Clause
Wrote a dissent
Douglas
Voted with the majority, joined Marshall's concurrence
Brennan
Wrote a special concurrence
Marshall
Voted with the majority, joined Marshall's concurrence
Stewart
Voted with the majority
White
Voted with the majority
Blackmun
Voted with the majority
Powell
Wrote the majority opinion
Burger
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Full Opinion by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Eastland v. U.S. Servicemen's Fund, 421 U.S. 491 (1975),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1974/1974_73_1923/>
(last visited ).