Document: 341 U.S. 367 71 S.Ct. 783 95 L.Ed. 1019 TENNEY et al.v.BRANDHOVE. No. 338. Argued March 1, 1951. Decided May 21, Mr. Harold C. Faulkner, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioners. Messrs. Martin J. Jarvis, Richard O. Graw, respondent. Justice FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of Court. 1 William Brandhove brought this action in United States District Court Northern California, alleging that he had been deprived rights guaranteed by Federal Constitution. The defendants are Jack B. Tenney and other members a committee California Legislature, Senate Fact-Finding Committee on Un-American Activities, colloquially known as Committee. Also named Elmer E. Robinson, Mayor Francisco. 2 is based §§ 43 47(3) Title 8 Code, U.S.C.A. 43, 47(3). These sections derive from one statutes, passed 1871, aimed at enforcing Fourteenth Amendment. Act April 20, c. 22, 2, 17 Stat. 13. Section provides: 3 'Every person who, under color any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, State Territory, subjects, causes to be subjected, citizen within jurisdiction thereof deprivation rights, privileges, immunities secured Constitution laws, shall liable party injured an law, suit equity, proper proceeding redress.' R.S. § 1979, U.S.C. 43. 4 provides civil remedy against 'two more persons' who may conspire deprive another constitutional therein defined.1 5 Reduced its legal essentials, complaint shows these facts. was constituted resolution June 1947. On January 28, 1949, circulated petition among Legislature. He alleges it order persuade Legislature not appropriate further funds charged used tool 'to smear Congressman Franck R. Havenner 'Red' when candidate Francisco 1947; Republican machine campaign management Havenner's opponent, conspired with end.' In view conflict between evidence previously given Brandhove, asked local prosecuting officials institute criminal proceedings him. also summoned appear before them hearing held 29. Testimony there taken allegedly member conspiracy. plaintiff appeared counsel, but refused give testimony. For this, prosecuted contempt courts. Upon jury's failure return verdict prosecution dropped. After testify, Chairman quoted testimony prior hearings. read into record statement concerning alleged newspaper article denying truth his charges, denial Committee's counsel—who absent Brandhove's charges were true. 6 29 'was legislative purpose,' designed intimidate silence deter prevent him effectively exercising free speech redress grievances, equal protection due process enjoyment privileges so did intimidate, silence, deter, plaintiff.' Damages $10,000 'for traveling, hotel accommodations, matters pertaining necessary defense' arising out punitive damages. 7 dismissed without Judge. Appeals Ninth Circuit held, however, stated cause members. 183 F.2d 121.2 We case here because important issues raised individuals power legislatures. 340 903, 279. again faced Reconstruction legislation which caused such concern Screws v. States, 325 91, 65 1031, 89 1495, Williams cases decided term. U.S., 97, 576; Id., 70, 581; 58, 595. But time we do have wrestle far-reaching questions constitutionality even construction. think clear founded does impose liability facts us, once they related presuppositions our political history. 9 privilege legislators arrest what say has taproots Parliamentary struggles Sixteenth Seventeenth Centuries. As Parliament achieved increasing independence Crown, grew stronger. 1523, Sir Thomas More could make only tentative claim. Roper, Life More, More's Utopia (Adams ed.) 10. 1668, after long bitter struggle, finally laid ghost Charles I, John Elliot others 'seditious' speeches Parliament. Proceedings Elliot, How. St.Tr., 294, 332. 1689, Bill Rights declared unequivocal language: 'That Freedom Speech, Debates Parliament, ought impeached questioned Place Parliament.' Wm. & Mary, Sess. II. See Stockdale Hansard, Ad. El. 113—114 (1839). 10 legislature matter course those severed Colonies Crown Nation. It deemed essential representatives people written Articles Confederation later Article V quite close English Rights: 'Freedom debate Congress court place * *.' 6, '* Speech Debate either House, (the Senators Representatives) Place.' 11 reason clear. well summarized James Wilson, influential Detail responsible provision 'In enable encourage representative public discharge trust firmness success, indispensably necessary, should enjoy fullest liberty speech, protected resentment every one, however powerful, whom exercise occasion offense.' II Works Wilson (Andrews ed. 1896) 38. Report Select Official Secrets Acts (House Commons, 1939) xiv. 12 reflection principles already firmly established States. Three Constitutions adopted specifically privilege. Maryland Declaration Rights, Nov. 3, 1776, provided: freedom debates judicature.' Art. VIII. Massachusetts 1780 provided 'The deliberation, debate, house legislature, people, cannot foundation accusation prosecution, action, complaint, whatsoever.' Part XXI. Chief Parsons gave following gloss Coffin Coffin, 1808, Mass. 27: 13 'These thus secured, intention protecting prosecutions their own benefit, support enabling execute functions office fear prosecutions, criminal. I therefore construed strictly, liberally, full design answered. will confine delivering opinion, uttering haranguing debate; extend giving vote, making report, act resulting nature, execution, office; would define securing exemption thing said done him, representative, office, inquiring whether regular according rules house, irregular rules.' 14 New Hampshire 1784 XXX.3 15 significant carefully framers Jefferson expressed excess.4 loyalist executive judiciary deposed, supreme most during Revolution. department everywhere extending sphere activity, drawing all impetuous vortex.' Madison, Federalist, XLVIII. 16 joined Union revised Constitutions, took great care preserve principle must speak liability. Forty-one forty-eight now specific provisions privilege.5 Did general language 1871 statute mean overturn tradition England Civil War preserved formation National Governments here? subject acts activity? Let us assume, merely moment, limit acting traditional sphere. That big assumption. ever rasher assumption find thought exercised power. difficulties hurdle. limits statute—now 8—were spelled debate. believe Congress—itself staunch advocate freedom—would impinge grounded history covert inclusion us. 18 come then question pleadings appears legitimate activity. Legislatures acquire unwarranted extension House Commons' claim establish little than pretense since Ashby White, Ld. Raym, 938, Id. 320. This hesitated sustain private found outside role. Kilbourn Thompson, 103 168, 26 377; Marshall Gordon, 243 521, 37 448, 61 881; compare McGrain Daugherty, 273 135, 176, 47 319, 329, 580. 19 unworthy purpose destroy Legislators immune deterrents uninhibited duty, indulgence good. One expect uncommon courage legislators. value if subjected cost inconvenience distractions trial upon conclusion pleader, hazard judgment speculation motives. holding Fletcher Peck, Cranch 87, 130, 162, consonant scheme government inquire motives legislators, remained unquestioned. cited Arizona 283 423, 455, 51 522, 526, 75 1154. 20 Investigations, standing special committees, part government.6 Legislative committees losing sight duty disinterestedness. times passion, dishonest vindictive readily attributed conduct believed.7 Courts controversies. Self-discipline voters ultimate reliance discouraging correcting abuses. courts go beyond narrow confines determining committee's inquiry fairly province. To investigation exceeded bounds obvious usurpation exclusively vested Judiciary Executive. present situation. indicated false, serious work investigating problem concern. entitled assert right call examine 21 noted legislature. deserves greater respect where official behalf sued seeks affirmative aid supra, allowed Sergeant-at-Arms, entered defendant House. 22 considered scope applied case. Miller case: 'It decide things done, other, extraordinary character, take legally responsible.' page 204. conclude individual field traditionally act, create conduct. 23 reversed affirmed. 24 Reversed. 25 BLACK, concurring. holds statutes1 intended personally damages witness result reached reference long-standing wise responsibility intra-legislative statements activities. Court's points 377, immunity some limits. And today's decision indicates point legislator's far exceeds Act. substantially agree reasoning conclusion. difficult me, emphasize here. 27 validity coextensive personal say, chairman persecution Indeed, understand decision, still much room challenge action. Thus example, instituted fine imprison perjury, certainly able defend himself ground creating actions unconstitutional void. 28 connection observe broadly drawn grave doubts constitutionally powers purportedly bestowed it.2 part, directs ascertain relating activities persons groups suspected dominated controlled foreign power, owe allegiance thereto religious, racial, political, ideological, philosophical, ties, including limited influence education, economic circumstances, social positions, fraternal casual associations, living standards, race, religion, politics, ancestry paid provocation Cal. Resolution 75, Of way sanction inquisition type apparently authorized resolution. 30 Unfortunately, true assemblies, born violated sacred trusts become instruments oppression. Many instances perhaps recent spectacular illustration use Argentine instrument strangle independent La Prensa views espoused.3 light experience, seem inappropriate country unorthodox unpopular opinions be, same amendment protects press. Those cherish press remember survive snuffing speak. 31 DOUGLAS, dissenting. 32 governing abuses solely body police. 33 dealing Constitution—the speech. charge seems strained sustain; weight authority down respondent Reprisal speaking abridgment restraint. If departs domain Constitution, can no why immune. Yet extent sought imposed petitioners 43.1 34 makes privileged. Included, course, hearings investigations lay today eyes law. depart impunity functions, sit kangaroo courts, try men loyalty beliefs? substitute juries? board censors over industry, prepare blacklists citizens, issue pronouncements devastating bill attainder? 35 No complete actions. Even policeman exacts confession force violence criminally Act, ruled day 576. hold extremes answerable legislation. consequence ruling test material here, impaired, traditional. leeway investigation. perverts brings whole illegal corrupt purpose, ends. indeed secure federal invasion officers agents states. see officer higher obtain. 1980 (pt. 3), 47(3), 47(3): 'If two Territory conspire, disguise highway premises another, depriving, directly indirectly, class laws; preventing hindering authorities force, intimidation, threat, lawfully advocacy manner, toward favor election qualified elector President Vice-President, Member States; injure property account advocacy; conspiracy set forth section, engaged do, furtherance object conspiracy, whereby property, having recovery damages, occasioned injury deprivation, conspirators.' affirmed dismissal Robinson law show denied review decision. 936, 853. preserving S.Car.Const.1776, VII; N.J.Const.1776, XXII. Compare N.Car.Const.1776, II, XLV. original made protect immediately adopted. Pa.Const.1790, 17; Ga.Const.1789, 14; Del.Const.1792, 11. Connecticut Rhode Island first constitutions enacted replace uncodified organic Conn.Const.1818, III, 10; R.I.Const.1842, IV, 5. York, 26, 1787, debates, senate assembly, assembly.' Virginia, colonies, assemblies built up strong Clarke, Privilege American (1943), passim, especially 70 93 seq. Jefferson, Notes Virginia (3d Am. 1801) 174—175. 1781. also, letter 15, 1789, published forthcoming volume Papers (Boyd ed.): tyranny legislatures formidable dread present, years.' currents formulated, Corwin, Progress Constitutional Theory Independence Meeting Philadelphia Convention, Am.Hist.Rev. 511 (1925). Ala.Const. 56; Ariz.Const. IV (ii), 7; Ark.Const. V, 15; Colo.Const. 16; Conn.Const. Del.Const. 13; Ga.Const. vii, par. 3; Idaho Const. Ill.Const. Ind.Const. 8; Kans.Const. 22; Ky.Const. 43; La.Const. Me.Const. IV(iii), Md.D.R. 10, 18; Pt. 21; Mich.Const. Minn.Const. Mo.Const. 19; Mont.Const. Nebr.Const. 26; N.H.Const. 30; N.J.Const. iv, N.M.Const. N.Y.Const. 11; N.D.Const. 42; Ohio 12; Okla.Const. Ore.Const. 9; Pa.Const. R.I.Const. 5; S.D.Const. Tenn.Const. Tex.Const. Utah VI, Vt.Const. ch. Va.Const. 48; Wash.Const. W.Va.Const. Wis.Const., Wyo.Const. 16. Iowa Const N.C.Const. (right legislator protest legislature). Calif.Const. Miss.Const. Nev.Const., S.C.Const. (freedom arrest). Only Florida Congressional Government (1885), 303: look diligently affair talk about sees. meant voice, embody wisdom constituents. Unless means acquainting itself disposition administrative government, helpless learn how being served; unless both scrutinize sift form discussion, remain embarrassing, crippling ignorance very affairs direct. informing function preferred function. Dilliard, Investigations: Role Press, U. Chi.L.Rev. 585. Judge Edgerton dissenting Barsky 83 U.S.App.D.C. 127, 138, 167 241, 252; Clark Josephson, Cir., 165 82, 93. N.Y. Times, Mar. 16, 1951, p. col. 2; N.Y.Times, 17, 2. situation graphically described editorial appearing Nacion Buenos Aires 18, 1951: 'But imagined until moment Congress, properly invested implicit investigation, decree interventions nature carry which, province alteration unusual importance affects inviolable principle. dictate 'laws restrictive press' (Art. 23, Constitution) possible step function, possession newspapers, hinder activity fate, rendered impracticable? state permitted becomes generalized, repetition whenever suitable conflicting opinions, guarantee utterly disregarded. Last year congressional commission (The Anti-Argentine Activities), appointed concrete served bring closure 49 newspapers day. *' generally, Editor Publisher, 24,

Category: 1