Stanford v. Texas
Encyclopedia
Stanford v. Texas, 379 U.S. 476
(1965), is a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States
. It stated in clear terms that, pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment
, the Fourth Amendment
rules regarding search and seizure applied to state governments. While this principle had been outlined in other cases (e.g., Mapp v. Ohio
), this case added another level of constitutional consideration for the issuance of search warrants when articles of expression, protected by the First Amendment
, are among the items to be taken. In effect, when a state issues a warrant that includes the order to seize books, it must accord the "most scrupulous exactitude" to the language of the Fourth Amendment.
, Stanford, operated a mail-order book business, "All Points of View," out of his private residence in San Antonio, Texas
. On December 27, 1963, Texas law enforcement officers—several Bexar County
deputies and two Assistant Attorneys General—appeared at Stanford's home with a warrant to search the premises. This warrant had been issued by a local magistrate for the purposes of seizing any books, lists, receipts, pictures, or other such effects related to the Communist Party of Texas, an organization that had been declared unlawful by a piece of Texas legislation known as the "Suppression Act." Among other provisions, the Suppression Act made it illegal to possess writings, recordings, photographs, etc. relating to the Communist Party of Texas, each instance of such possession potentially bringing a prison sentence of 20 years.
Stanford was not home at the time officers arrived, but his wife allowed police into the home after being read the warrant. Officers evidently tried to locate Stanford, without success, before beginning their search. This search lasted around five hours. When the search was completed, officers had, in total, seized approximately 2,000 of Stanford's books, pamphlets, and papers, which were then packed into 14 cartons and sent to an investigator's office in the county courthouse. In the entire collection of seized material, investigators did not find any articles related to the Communist Party of Texas. Many of the seized books had been, in fact, intended for sale in Stanford's home business. Also among the seized items was an array of Stanford's private documents, insurance policies, personal correspondence, and even his marriage certificate. Due to this fact, and the fact that the investigation had yielded no evidence of criminal activity, Stanford filed a motion with the magistrate who had issued the warrant, requesting that the warrant be annulled and his property be returned. After a hearing, Stanford's motion was denied without further comment from the court. By statute, the decision of the local court was final on this matter, leaving only the Supreme Court as an avenue of appeal. The Court
granted certiorari
and heard arguments on November 12, 1964.
John Stanford helped organize the San Antonio Committee to Free Angela Davis in the early 1970s and still lives in San Antonio. He was also active for many years in the peace movement and with Black communist John Inman of San Antonio. Stanford established relationships with SNCC, the Black Panthers, and other groups active in the San Antonio area.
delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court. In a demonstration of how strong the agreement among the Justices was, the Court stated that it would not even consider the majority of Stanford's arguments against the warrant, stating it required only one of his objections to determine that the search had been unconstitutional. Namely, the Court said that the warrant that had been issued was a general warrant, something that the Fourth Amendment had been created specifically to prevent. Such a warrant required only the reasonable belief of wrongdoing, and granted law enforcement officials considerable leeway in what they were allowed to seize as evidence of a crime. The Court offers a quote from Revolutionary War
-era figure James Otis
; regarding writs of assistance, Otis remarks, "[they are] the worst instrument of arbitrary power ... that ever was found in an English law book... [placing] the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer."
Much of the Court's opinion pertains to the history of warrants, and the constitutional interest in preventing warrants that are too broad in scope. In fact, the Court's discussion of this history comprises more than half of the unquoted text of the opinion. Near the end of the Court's opinion, it summarizes its purpose in discussing history at such length:
The magistrate's order was vacated, and the case was remanded to lower court for its final disposition, consistent with the ruling above.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1965), is a major decision 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...
. It stated in clear terms that, pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the Dred Scott v...
, the Fourth Amendment
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause...
rules regarding search and seizure applied to state governments. While this principle had been outlined in other cases (e.g., Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio
Mapp v. Ohio, , was a landmark case in criminal procedure, in which the United States Supreme Court decided that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures," may not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts, as well as...
), this case added another level of constitutional consideration for the issuance of search warrants when articles of expression, protected by the 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...
, are among the items to be taken. In effect, when a state issues a warrant that includes the order to seize books, it must accord the "most scrupulous exactitude" to the language of the Fourth Amendment.
Background
The petitionerPetitioner
A petitioner is a person who pleads with governmental institution for a legal remedy or a redress of grievances, through use of a petition.-In the courts:The petitioner may seek a legal remedy if the state or another private person has acted unlawfully...
, Stanford, operated a mail-order book business, "All Points of View," out of his private residence in San Antonio, Texas
San Antonio, Texas
San Antonio is the seventh-largest city in the United States of America and the second-largest city within the state of Texas, with a population of 1.33 million. Located in the American Southwest and the south–central part of Texas, the city serves as the seat of Bexar County. In 2011,...
. On December 27, 1963, Texas law enforcement officers—several Bexar County
Bexar County, Texas
As of the census of 2000, there were 1,392,931 people, 488,942 households, and 345,681 families residing in the county. The population density was 1,117 people per square mile . There were 521,359 housing units at an average density of 418 per square mile...
deputies and two Assistant Attorneys General—appeared at Stanford's home with a warrant to search the premises. This warrant had been issued by a local magistrate for the purposes of seizing any books, lists, receipts, pictures, or other such effects related to the Communist Party of Texas, an organization that had been declared unlawful by a piece of Texas legislation known as the "Suppression Act." Among other provisions, the Suppression Act made it illegal to possess writings, recordings, photographs, etc. relating to the Communist Party of Texas, each instance of such possession potentially bringing a prison sentence of 20 years.
Stanford was not home at the time officers arrived, but his wife allowed police into the home after being read the warrant. Officers evidently tried to locate Stanford, without success, before beginning their search. This search lasted around five hours. When the search was completed, officers had, in total, seized approximately 2,000 of Stanford's books, pamphlets, and papers, which were then packed into 14 cartons and sent to an investigator's office in the county courthouse. In the entire collection of seized material, investigators did not find any articles related to the Communist Party of Texas. Many of the seized books had been, in fact, intended for sale in Stanford's home business. Also among the seized items was an array of Stanford's private documents, insurance policies, personal correspondence, and even his marriage certificate. Due to this fact, and the fact that the investigation had yielded no evidence of criminal activity, Stanford filed a motion with the magistrate who had issued the warrant, requesting that the warrant be annulled and his property be returned. After a hearing, Stanford's motion was denied without further comment from the court. By statute, the decision of the local court was final on this matter, leaving only the Supreme Court as an avenue of appeal. The Court
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...
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 heard arguments on November 12, 1964.
John Stanford helped organize the San Antonio Committee to Free Angela Davis in the early 1970s and still lives in San Antonio. He was also active for many years in the peace movement and with Black communist John Inman of San Antonio. Stanford established relationships with SNCC, the Black Panthers, and other groups active in the San Antonio area.
The Decision
On January 18, 1965, Justice StewartPotter Stewart
Potter Stewart was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. During his tenure, he made, among other areas, major contributions to criminal justice reform, civil rights, access to the courts, and Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.-Education:Stewart was born in Jackson, Michigan,...
delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court. In a demonstration of how strong the agreement among the Justices was, the Court stated that it would not even consider the majority of Stanford's arguments against the warrant, stating it required only one of his objections to determine that the search had been unconstitutional. Namely, the Court said that the warrant that had been issued was a general warrant, something that the Fourth Amendment had been created specifically to prevent. Such a warrant required only the reasonable belief of wrongdoing, and granted law enforcement officials considerable leeway in what they were allowed to seize as evidence of a crime. The Court offers a quote from Revolutionary War
American Revolution
The American Revolution was the political upheaval during the last half of the 18th century in which thirteen colonies in North America joined together to break free from the British Empire, combining to become the United States of America...
-era figure James Otis
James Otis, Jr.
James Otis, Jr. was a lawyer in colonial Massachusetts, a member of the Massachusetts provincial assembly, and an early advocate of the political views that led to the American Revolution. The phrase "Taxation without Representation is Tyranny" is usually attributed to him...
; regarding writs of assistance, Otis remarks, "[they are] the worst instrument of arbitrary power ... that ever was found in an English law book... [placing] the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer."
Much of the Court's opinion pertains to the history of warrants, and the constitutional interest in preventing warrants that are too broad in scope. In fact, the Court's discussion of this history comprises more than half of the unquoted text of the opinion. Near the end of the Court's opinion, it summarizes its purpose in discussing history at such length:
- "In short, what this history indispensably teaches is that the constitutional requirement that warrants must particularly describe the 'things to be seized' is to be accorded the most scrupulous exactitude when the 'things' are books, and the basis for their seizure is the ideas which they contain."
The magistrate's order was vacated, and the case was remanded to lower court for its final disposition, consistent with the ruling above.