top of page
Search

Today in Supreme Court History: December 27

  • Dec 26, 2025
  • 1 min read

Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General of the United States, 419 U.S. 1314 (decided December 27, 1974): Marshall denies stay of Circuit Court order; as a result FBI agents are allowed to attend/monitor SWP’s national youth convention; convention was open to the public, agents would not be disruptive, and if agents were excluded “the potential injury to the FBI’s continuing investigative efforts would be apparent” (unclear what they were investigating) (this decision certainly changed the tone of the convention, with everyone knowing FBI agents were milling around)

P.S. Some of the “radicals” at my undergrad college flattered themselves by thinking the FBI was snooping around on campus.  If that was really true, it would have been a waste of taxpayer dollars.  We were just a harmless, disorganized bunch of idiots, no threat to anything, let alone national security.  Half of us couldn’t even spell.  My friend (“Rasta John”) was absolutely convinced.  Supposedly one could tell a wiretap by a “click” on the phone line.  While talking to him on the phone I would tap my pen against the receiver.  “Did you hear that??!”  “No, John.  Anyway . . .”  And then I tapped my pen again.  He went stark raving nuts.  With some people, it’s almost as if you’re being dared.

 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
Today in Supreme Court History: March 26

Baker v. Carr , 369 U.S. 186 (decided March 26, 1962): federal courts have jurisdiction over suits alleging disproportionate redistricting in violation of Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection (on rem

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: March 25

United States v. Quality Stores, Inc. , 572 U.S. 141 (decided March 25, 2014): must withhold FICA from severance pay because it’s “wages” (?) Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society , 503 U.S. 429 (decid

 
 
 
Today in Supreme Court History: March 24

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections,  383 U.S. 663 (decided March 24, 1966): poll tax violates Equal Protection (though literacy tests are o.k. if not used for discriminatory purpose) Ramirez v. Col

 
 
 

Comments


Thanks for submitting!

bottom of page