top of page
Search

Today in Supreme Court History: August 5

  • Aug 4, 2025
  • 1 min read

Davis v. Adams, 400 U.S. 1203 (decided August 5, 1969): Black upholds stay of Florida statute requiring incumbents of state office to resign that office before running for federal office; Black notes that there is not enough time before election for full Court to rule but believes that it would hold that Florida cannot add qualifications to candidates for federal office (the Court never ruled on the question, but the “resign to run” statute is still in force, with an exception for federal office, see https://www.votepinellas.com/Candidates-Committees/ Candidates/-Resign-to-Run)


Scaggs v. Larsen, 396 U.S. 1206 (decided August 5, 1969): Douglas holds that habeas corpus can be invoked by serviceman who claims that his term of duty was unfairly extended (penalized for not reporting for training but he was for some reason not permitted to attend); orders him released; 9th Circuit later affirmed conviction (without opinion) and cert denied, with Douglas dissenting

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
Today in Supreme Court History: April 2

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp. , 549 U.S. 561 (decided April 2, 2007): “modification” can mean different things in different (complicated) environmental statutes; the upshot was that this

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: April 1

FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project, 592 U.S. 414 (decided April 1, 2021): In 2017 the Trump-led FCC reversed long-standing policy, affirmed in 2016, and permitted, in the same market, cross-ownership of

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: March 31

United States v. Lanier , 520 U.S. 259 (decided March 31, 1997): state judge should have known sexual assaults would inculpate him under 12 U.S.C. §242 (the criminal counterpart to 42 U.S.C. §1983) ev

 
 
 

1 Comment


Syd Henderson
Aug 05, 2025

The law in Davis v. Adams would mean that governors would have to resign before running for the Senate or President, while Senators could run and hold their seat. Tim Walz would have had a difficult decision when Kamala asked him to be her running mate. I'm curious, though, if there is an exemption for running for federal office, what does it do? Did it also prohibit people holding one state office from running for another. I remember the current governor of Georgia ran for that office while being Secretary of State for Georgia, putting him in charge of the election he was running in, which seemed a pretty good case of conflict of interest. And, of course, you get…

Like

Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page