Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Constitutional Law - Due Process - Automatic And Permanent Dismissal Of Public School Teachers For Invoking The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, John B. Huck S.Ed.
Constitutional Law - Due Process - Automatic And Permanent Dismissal Of Public School Teachers For Invoking The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, John B. Huck S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Petitioners, employed as public school teachers in New York City, were subpoenaed to appear before a Senate Internal Security Subcommittee. When questioned by the committee about communist activities, petitioners asserted the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. Pursuant to the New York City Charter, they were summarily dismissed and permanently barred from re-employment by the city. No hearing was required nor given prior to the dismissal. There was no evidence of conduct otherwise warranting a dismissal. In an action for reinstatement, held, dismissal affirmed. Daniman v. Board of Education of City of New York, 306 N.Y. 532, 119 N.E. (2d) …
Constitutional Law - Federal Anti-Subversive Legislation - The Communist Control Act Of 1954, Paul R. Haerle
Constitutional Law - Federal Anti-Subversive Legislation - The Communist Control Act Of 1954, Paul R. Haerle
Michigan Law Review
This comment is intended as a preliminary step in an analysis of the legislative history of the act and a consideration of both its potential effectiveness and constitutional validity.
Griswold: The Fifth Amendment Today, George S. Flint S.Ed.
Griswold: The Fifth Amendment Today, George S. Flint S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
A Review of The Fifth Amendment Today. By Erwin N. Griswold
Constitutional Law - Legislative Contempt Power-Procedure Against Witness For Conduct Before Commission Composed Of Legislators And Others, Julius B. Poppinga
Constitutional Law - Legislative Contempt Power-Procedure Against Witness For Conduct Before Commission Composed Of Legislators And Others, Julius B. Poppinga
Michigan Law Review
The Massachusetts General Court, for the purpose of investigating communism and subversive activities within the Commonwealth, established by joint resolution a "special commission" composed of two members of the Senate, three members of the House, and two persons to be appointed by the governor. When the commission summoned Otis A. Hood to appear before it, he refused to be sworn as a witness without first receiving witness fees, and flippantly expressed his demand for payment. The general court requested an advisory opinion of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, propounding three questions: (1) whether the special commission was a committee …
Labor Law - Arbitration - Right Of Employer Of Discharge Employer Who Refuses To Testify Concerning His Communist Affiliation, Mary Lee Ryan
Labor Law - Arbitration - Right Of Employer Of Discharge Employer Who Refuses To Testify Concerning His Communist Affiliation, Mary Lee Ryan
Michigan Law Review
A member of the United Electrical Workers Union was discharged from the J. H. Day Company because of his refusal to testify concerning his communist affiliation before the Ohio Un-American Activities Committee and because of the unfavorable publicity which had resulted. Under grievance procedure, the union brought the matter before arbitration. Findings, there was no just cause for dismissal. The employee is entitled to back pay and to reinstatement subject to security clearance. J. H. Day Company,. 22 LAB. Aim. RBP. 751 (1954).
Federal Supremacy And State Anti-Subversive Legislation, Alan Reeve Hunt
Federal Supremacy And State Anti-Subversive Legislation, Alan Reeve Hunt
Michigan Law Review
State legislatures have been prompted by international tensions of recent years to enact new and stringent anti-subversive laws, thus adding to an already large body of statutes directed against various forms of subversion. Many of these statutes are open to serious objection on constitutional ·grounds. The purpose of this article is to examine those objections which are based upon the notion either that federal power in the area is exclusive or that Congress, expressly or by necessary inference, has pre-empted the field.