Scull v. Virginia ex rel. Comm. on Law Reform and Racial Activities
Encyclopedia
Scull v. Virginia ex rel. Committee on Law Reform and Racial Activities, 359 U.S. 344 (1959) is a 9-to-0 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States
which held that a conviction violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution if the defendant is not given an opportunity "to determine whether he was within his rights in refusing to answer" an inquiry put to him by the legislature of a U.S. state
.
enacted a package of statutes in September 1956 designed to ensure racial segregation
in that state's public schools despite the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States
in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas
, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). The legislative program ("the Stanley plan
") was named for Governor
Thomas B. Stanley
, who proposed the program and successfully pushed for its enactment. The Stanley plan was a critical element in the policy of "massive resistance
" to the Brown ruling advocated by U.S. Senator
Harry F. Byrd, Sr. The Stanley plan was introduced and passed during a special session of the Virginia General Assembly
. During the special session, Delegate James McIlhany Thomson, an ardent segregationist, introduced a bill (unrelated to the Stanley plan) to establish a seven-member Assembly committee to investigate any group seeking to influence public opinion in the state, teacher quality, uniformity of courses and curriculum in the public schools, and the effects of integration on public education. The bill passed on the last day of the special session. The legislation established a 10-member Assembly committee composed of six delegates and four senators. The committee was charged with investigating the effect of integration on public schools, racial matters in the state in general, and the effectiveness of racial legislation. The committee was to issue a report and make recommendations (if any) to the Assembly by November 1, 1957.
The legislative investigating committee was officially titled the Virginia Committee on Law Reform and Racial Activities, but was publicly known as the "Thomson Committee" after its chair, Delegate Thomson. In 1954, David Scull (a printer in Annandale, Virginia
) began publishing literature in favor of racial integration on behalf of a number of organizations in Virginia. The Fairfax Citizens' Council, a group opposed to racial integation, publicized Scull's role in the printing of the literature in 1957. Scull was subpoenaed to appear before the Thomson Committee, and subjected to an aggressive series of questions (many of which did not pertain to the committee's legal charge). Scull refused to answer some of these questions and asked whether they pertained to the committee's legal charge. The committee went to court to force him to answer. The Circuit Court of Arlington County ordered Scull to answer the questions. He refused, and was convicted of contempt of court
.
Scull appealed his conviction to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Without comment, the state supreme court declined to hear his appeal in 1958.
Scull appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted certiorari
and agreed to hear the case.
wrote the decision for the unanimous Court.
Scull made four claims: 1) That the committee was part of a program of state-sponsored harassment of those attempting to win racial integration of Virginia's public schools; 2) That the questions put to him violated his First Amendment
rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and right to petition; 3) That the information sought was not relevant to the legislative function of the Virginia General Assembly; and 4) That despite repeated requests, the committee failed to show that its interrogatories were relevant to its legal charge.
Black declined to address the first three of Scull's claims, deciding instead to rule on the narrow grounds of the fourth claim. The record of the committee's proceedings showed that Scull asked the committee what the purpose of its inquiry was, so that he could determine which questions put to him were pertinent. Chairman Thomson made an ambiguous reply, then told Scull that "several" of the lines of inquiry did not apply to Scull When Scull claimed that he still did not know what properly constituted the committee's subjects of inquiry, the committee proceeded to ask 31 questions of Scull. Black expressed scepticism regarding the committee's actions: "It is difficult to see how some of these questions have any relationship to the subjects the Committee was authorized to investigate, or how Scull could possibly discover any such relationship from the Chairman's statement."
Thomson's testimony in the contempt proceeding before the Circuit Court further muddied things. During his testimony, Thomson "successively ruled out as inapplicable to Scull each of the subjects which the Legislature had authorized the Committee to investigate." Nor did the state circuit court's instructions to Scull clarify matters. Black noted that the circuit court did not analyze any of the 31 questions put to Scull, did not explain to Scull what the subject of the committee's inquiry was, and did not explain how these questions related to that inquiry.
It was clear, Black held, that the questions put to Scull clearly involved the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of association. The Court's long-established test in such cases was to determine if there was a compelling governmental interest which could justify infringement on these fundamental rights. But the majority did not need to reach even this constitutional question, Black concluded, because Thomson's, the committee's, and the circuit court's statements about the subject of inquiry were so unclear that Scull was prevented from knowing what he was supposed to answer. "To sustain his conviction for contempt under these circumstances would be to send him to jail for a crime he could not with reasonable certainty know he was committing."
The Supreme Court had repeatedly held (Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451 [1939], Jordan v. De George, 341 U.S. 223 [1951], Watkins v. United States
, 354 U.S. 178 [1957], Flaxer v. United States, 358 U.S. 147 [1958]) that "fundamental fairness" required that a reasonable certainty exist as to what crime an individual might be committing. Relying on Winters v. New York, 333 U.S. 507 (1948), Black concluded that such certainty is "essential" when individuals are asked to give up their freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of association out of a fear of violating a vague law. But the "far too wavering, confused and cloudy" responses given to Scull did not meet these standards.
The Court reversed and remanded the case to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals.
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
which held that a conviction violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution if the defendant is not given an opportunity "to determine whether he was within his rights in refusing to answer" an inquiry put to him by the legislature of a U.S. state
U.S. state
A U.S. state is any one of the 50 federated states of the United States of America that share sovereignty with the federal government. Because of this shared sovereignty, an American is a citizen both of the federal entity and of his or her state of domicile. Four states use the official title of...
.
Background
The state of VirginiaVirginia
The Commonwealth of Virginia , is a U.S. state on the Atlantic Coast of the Southern United States. Virginia is nicknamed the "Old Dominion" and sometimes the "Mother of Presidents" after the eight U.S. presidents born there...
enacted a package of statutes in September 1956 designed to ensure racial segregation
Racial segregation in the United States
Racial segregation in the United States, as a general term, included the racial segregation or hypersegregation of facilities, services, and opportunities such as housing, medical care, education, employment, and transportation along racial lines...
in that state's public schools despite the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas
Brown v. Board of Education
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 , was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students unconstitutional. The decision overturned the Plessy v. Ferguson decision of 1896 which...
, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). The legislative program ("the Stanley plan
Stanley plan
The Stanley plan was a package of 13 statutes adopted in September 1956 by the U.S. state of Virginia designed to ensure racial segregation in that state's public schools despite the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 347 U.S. 483 ....
") was named for Governor
Governor of Virginia
The governor of Virginia serves as the chief executive of the Commonwealth of Virginia for a four-year term. The position is currently held by Republican Bob McDonnell, who was inaugurated on January 16, 2010, as the 71st governor of Virginia....
Thomas B. Stanley
Thomas Bahnson Stanley
Thomas Bahnson Stanley was an American politician, manufacturer and Holstein cattle breeder.-Early life:...
, who proposed the program and successfully pushed for its enactment. The Stanley plan was a critical element in the policy of "massive resistance
Massive resistance
Massive resistance was a policy declared by U.S. Senator Harry F. Byrd, Sr. on February 24, 1956, to unite other white politicians and leaders in Virginia in a campaign of new state laws and policies to prevent public school desegregation after the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision...
" to the Brown ruling advocated by U.S. Senator
United States Senate
The United States Senate is the upper house of the bicameral legislature of the United States, and together with the United States House of Representatives comprises the United States Congress. The composition and powers of the Senate are established in Article One of the U.S. Constitution. Each...
Harry F. Byrd, Sr. The Stanley plan was introduced and passed during a special session of the Virginia General Assembly
Virginia General Assembly
The Virginia General Assembly is the legislative body of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the oldest legislative body in the Western Hemisphere, established on July 30, 1619. The General Assembly is a bicameral body consisting of a lower house, the Virginia House of Delegates, with 100 members,...
. During the special session, Delegate James McIlhany Thomson, an ardent segregationist, introduced a bill (unrelated to the Stanley plan) to establish a seven-member Assembly committee to investigate any group seeking to influence public opinion in the state, teacher quality, uniformity of courses and curriculum in the public schools, and the effects of integration on public education. The bill passed on the last day of the special session. The legislation established a 10-member Assembly committee composed of six delegates and four senators. The committee was charged with investigating the effect of integration on public schools, racial matters in the state in general, and the effectiveness of racial legislation. The committee was to issue a report and make recommendations (if any) to the Assembly by November 1, 1957.
The legislative investigating committee was officially titled the Virginia Committee on Law Reform and Racial Activities, but was publicly known as the "Thomson Committee" after its chair, Delegate Thomson. In 1954, David Scull (a printer in Annandale, Virginia
Annandale, Virginia
Annandale is a census-designated place in Fairfax County, Virginia, United States. The population was 41,008 at the 2010 census, down from 54,994 in 2000 due to the splitting off of the western part of it to form Wakefield and Woodburn CDP's.-Geography:...
) began publishing literature in favor of racial integration on behalf of a number of organizations in Virginia. The Fairfax Citizens' Council, a group opposed to racial integation, publicized Scull's role in the printing of the literature in 1957. Scull was subpoenaed to appear before the Thomson Committee, and subjected to an aggressive series of questions (many of which did not pertain to the committee's legal charge). Scull refused to answer some of these questions and asked whether they pertained to the committee's legal charge. The committee went to court to force him to answer. The Circuit Court of Arlington County ordered Scull to answer the questions. He refused, and was convicted of contempt of court
Contempt of court
Contempt of court is a court order which, in the context of a court trial or hearing, declares a person or organization to have disobeyed or been disrespectful of the court's authority...
.
Scull appealed his conviction to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Without comment, the state supreme court declined to hear his appeal in 1958.
Scull appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted certiorari
Certiorari
Certiorari is a type of writ seeking judicial review, recognized in U.S., Roman, English, Philippine, and other law. Certiorari is the present passive infinitive of the Latin certiorare...
and agreed to hear the case.
Ruling
Associate Justice Hugo BlackHugo Black
Hugo Lafayette Black was an American politician and jurist. A member of the Democratic Party, Black represented Alabama in the United States Senate from 1927 to 1937, and served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1937 to 1971. Black was nominated to the Supreme...
wrote the decision for the unanimous Court.
Scull made four claims: 1) That the committee was part of a program of state-sponsored harassment of those attempting to win racial integration of Virginia's public schools; 2) That the questions put to him violated his First Amendment
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering...
rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and right to petition; 3) That the information sought was not relevant to the legislative function of the Virginia General Assembly; and 4) That despite repeated requests, the committee failed to show that its interrogatories were relevant to its legal charge.
Black declined to address the first three of Scull's claims, deciding instead to rule on the narrow grounds of the fourth claim. The record of the committee's proceedings showed that Scull asked the committee what the purpose of its inquiry was, so that he could determine which questions put to him were pertinent. Chairman Thomson made an ambiguous reply, then told Scull that "several" of the lines of inquiry did not apply to Scull When Scull claimed that he still did not know what properly constituted the committee's subjects of inquiry, the committee proceeded to ask 31 questions of Scull. Black expressed scepticism regarding the committee's actions: "It is difficult to see how some of these questions have any relationship to the subjects the Committee was authorized to investigate, or how Scull could possibly discover any such relationship from the Chairman's statement."
Thomson's testimony in the contempt proceeding before the Circuit Court further muddied things. During his testimony, Thomson "successively ruled out as inapplicable to Scull each of the subjects which the Legislature had authorized the Committee to investigate." Nor did the state circuit court's instructions to Scull clarify matters. Black noted that the circuit court did not analyze any of the 31 questions put to Scull, did not explain to Scull what the subject of the committee's inquiry was, and did not explain how these questions related to that inquiry.
It was clear, Black held, that the questions put to Scull clearly involved the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of association. The Court's long-established test in such cases was to determine if there was a compelling governmental interest which could justify infringement on these fundamental rights. But the majority did not need to reach even this constitutional question, Black concluded, because Thomson's, the committee's, and the circuit court's statements about the subject of inquiry were so unclear that Scull was prevented from knowing what he was supposed to answer. "To sustain his conviction for contempt under these circumstances would be to send him to jail for a crime he could not with reasonable certainty know he was committing."
The Supreme Court had repeatedly held (Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451 [1939], Jordan v. De George, 341 U.S. 223 [1951], Watkins v. United States
Watkins v. United States
Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178 , was a case brought to the Supreme Court of the United States after John Watkins was convicted under , for failing to answer questions while posed as a witness relating to people he may have known to be communist...
, 354 U.S. 178 [1957], Flaxer v. United States, 358 U.S. 147 [1958]) that "fundamental fairness" required that a reasonable certainty exist as to what crime an individual might be committing. Relying on Winters v. New York, 333 U.S. 507 (1948), Black concluded that such certainty is "essential" when individuals are asked to give up their freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of association out of a fear of violating a vague law. But the "far too wavering, confused and cloudy" responses given to Scull did not meet these standards.
The Court reversed and remanded the case to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals.