Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Constitutional Law

1955

Testimony

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Legislation - Witness Immunity Act Of 1954 - Constitutional And Interpretative Problem, George S. Flint S.Ed. Apr 1955

Legislation - Witness Immunity Act Of 1954 - Constitutional And Interpretative Problem, George S. Flint S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The passage in August, 1954 of a federal statute granting immunity under specified conditions to witnesses before congressional committees and in the federal courts marks a third legislative experiment designed to soften the effect of the Fifth Amendment as a limitation on the investigatory power of Congress. The first two attempts were less than successful. This comment will discuss the historical background of immunity legislation, and some possible constitutional pitfalls and problems of construction created by the statutory language.


Griswold: The Fifth Amendment Today, George S. Flint S.Ed. Mar 1955

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 Feb 1955

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 …