Document: 331 U.S. 100 67 S.Ct. 1140 91 L.Ed. 1368 FLEMINGv.RHODES et al. No. 682. Argued April 7, 1947. Decided 28, Mr. Samuel Mermin, of Washington, D.C., for appellant. No appearance appellees. Justice REED delivered the opinion Court. 1 This appeal is from an interlocutory order District Court United States Northern Texas denying preliminary injunctions. Appellant's predecessor sued certain landlord appellees and Sheriff a constable Tarrant County, Texas, in that district court injunction to stop eviction tenants under state judgments were recovered by landlords suits restitution leased property.1 The filed without certificates required Rent Regulations Housing maintain such actions. 8 F.R. 7322; 10 11666; 11 5824, 8106. entered after June 30, 1946, termination date Emergency Price Control Act, before July 25, approval President Extension Act. As there was no federal price control statute during this period, these will be treated as valid when granted. 2 decision court, motion directing entry order, based on unconstitutionality, applied judgments, portion § 18 Act declared, 'The provisions shall take effect * *'.2 provision thought unconstitutional (1) because words affected retroactively bringing them Act3 (2) vested rights, created prior obtain their properties, could not destroyed subsequent legislation. Apparently it felt due process clause Fifth Amendment forbade regulation incidents judgments. question raised whether August 24, 1937, 50 Stat. 751, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 17, 349a, 380a, 401, confers power upon review, direct appeal, ruling against constitutionality act Congress unconstitutionality made application particular circumstance, rather than challenged whole. A reading first three sections convinces us granted litigants courts decisions any pending litigation. 3 section only authorizesthe interv ention private litigation, 'whenever affecting public interest drawn question.'4 It has nothing do with appeals. second allows final or party, through preceding roiginally, law. provides expedition our determination appeal. Section relates allowance refusal injunctions staying acts whole part ground repugnancy Constitution, requires three-judge notice States. specific prompt review granting 'in part' limited applications stays unconstitutionality. Thus comes party litigation below sought. enables exercise large discretion, its intervene, what cases are reviewable directly Court.5 intended acts.6 Since intervention 'drawn question' intervention, follows invalidates, unconstitutional, applied. To limit generality language involved statutes might seriously impair determinations matters great interest. Litigants may challenge so far affects them.7 We hold jurisdiction conferred U.S.C. 349a. 4 also view 265 Judicial Code, 379, barred officials. 5 appellant sought njunctions future writs other which consummated. Sections 2(d), 4(a) 205(a) 1942, amended, Regulation 6(a), set out below.8 Such accord administrative Interpretations Regulation.9 properties defense-area housing accommodations. There suggestion heretofore referred 6 authorize legal proceedings. acts, generally considered, unquestioned. Bowles v. Willingham, 321 503, 64 641, 88 892. sole inquiry us, at point, erroneous refuse allow temporary injunction, would invade constitutional right retain fruits 'vested rights' undertaking enjoin lessees, consideration proviso margin.10 retroactive 18, quoted above note 2, inapposite same reason. immaterial obtained effective effort proceedings acquisition characterized rights.' Federal action rights previously acquired person regulated prohibited Constitution. So long Constitution authorizes subsequently enacted legislation, fact interfere does condemn it. Immunity gained forehanded contracts. Were otherwise paramount powers nullified 'prophetic discernment.'11 have different standing.12 protection accommodations defense-areas accomplished notwithstanding should been 7 Only word need said contention Code forbids execution officers.13 similar last term stay state. argument accepted. 205 (a) 1942 exception 265.14 mention opinions officers who parties case enjoined. However, we see ground, differentiate sheriff says think had constable. Judgment reversed. 9 FRANKFURTER (dissenting). In considering scope appellate jurisdiction, weight given strong policy Congress, ever since Judiciary 1891, keep docket within manageable proportions wise disposition causes ultimate judicial tribunal. That applies few Acts, passed creation circuit appeals, come here where issues importance, stake. Dahnke-Walker Milling Co. Bondurant, 257 282, 42 106, 107, 66 239, gave expansive content matter right, State 'the validity statute.' Our held cover finding situation, though left full force effect. While, reasons forth dissent Brandeis, I never reconciled soundness decision, accept But feel obliged extend beyond requirements. 12 important difference between courts. latter subject course They dependent grace certiorari, comparable except doctrine. myself lies whenever finds circumstances case. one thing fate delayed until can go appeals then reach quite another bring every indicating application, how restricted incidence. Of mean available involve whole' statute. 1937 refers explicitly invalidation part.' Although explicit here, score ought called strikes down, part, unequivocally written. unwarranted all issue allowable written excludes situation. 13 immediate gives point general observations. judgment thus procedure State. These hardly questions kind led authorization, court's 'is Congress.' 752, 401. 14 Nor decisive Court's exceptional distict Government litigant. Like times attaches importance proportion more comprehensive factors jurisdiction. cannot blind sometimes pressed response commendable earnestness fails, however, fully into account demands business. Moreover, moved grant By 1925 narrowly confined regardless character litigant, extension strictly confined. 15 dismiss remand Circuit Appeals. See Oklahoma Gas & Electric Packing Co., 292 386, 392, 54 732, 735, 78 1318, Phillips States, 312 246, 254, 61 480, 484, 85 800. Jurisdiction 56 23, 58 632, 59 306, Pub.Law 548, 79th Cong., 2d Sess., U.S.C.A.Appendix, 901 seq., 925. 901a note, supra. relies prohibition Housing, 8106, unnecessary consider further mere inclusion past advancing act, constitutional. Compare Blodgett Holden, 275 142, 146, 276 594, 48 105, 72 206, Untermeyer Anderson, 440, 445, 353, 354, 645, Hudson, 299 498, 57 309, 81 370. construed 288, 237, 344, resort upholding repugnance settled construction words. Kepner 195 100, 124, 24 797, 802, 49 114, Ann.Cas. 655. International Ladies Garment Workers' Union Donnelly 304 243, 249, 250, 875, 879, 82 1316. H.Rep.No.212, 75th 1st p. 2: Nation disputed comment.' S.Rep.No.963, pp. 3, 4: excluded principle stated, drawing proper assistance either original intervenor, when, affect large, respect entrusted care Nation, concerning owes duty citizens securing common Blackmer 284 421, 442, 52 252, 256, 76 375; Virginian R. System Federation, 300 515, 558, 592, 604, 789; Carmichael Southern Coal Coke 301 495, 513, 868, 874, 1245, 109 A.L.R. 1327. 306: 2(d). 'Whenever Administrator necessary effectuate purposes he may, regulate prohibit renting leasing practices (including relating recovery possession) connection accommodations, his equivalent likely result rent increases, inconsistent Act.' 4(a). 'It unlawful, contract, agreement, lease, obligation hereafter into, omit violation offer, solicit, attempt, agree foregoing.' 205(a). engaged about engage constitute make appropriate enjoining practices, enforcing compliance provision, showing permanent restraining bond.' 7322, 8106: 'Section 6. 'Removal tenant—(a) Restrictions removal tenant. tenant continues pay entitled, removed evict recover possession, exclusion otherwise, nor attempt lease rental agreement expired terminated, tenant's confession breach covenants thereof contrary hereto, *' Pike Fischer, OPA Service, Rent, 6—VI, issued 1946: '(a) Interpretation 6—VI. Evictions Pending On 1946. extended striking 'June 1946' substituting 1947,' expiration ffect savings inserted persons acted interim period Jun transaction occurring dates deemed violation. occurred regulation. reason evicted receives protection. If, possession entitled accordance regulation.' 'Provided further, transaction, omission failure enactment Stabilization regulation, schedule, requirement Acts: *'. Sproles Binford, 286 374, 391, 581, 586, 1167; Louisville Nashville Mottley, 219 467, 31 265, 55 297, 34 L.R.A.,N.S., 671; Philadelphia, B. W.R. Schubert, 224 603, 32 589, 911; Calhoun Massie, 253 170, 40 474, 843; Norman Baltimore Ohio 294 240, 303 311, 407, 414—417, 79 885, 95 1352; Guaranty Trust New York Henwood, 307 247, 259, 847, 853, 83 1266. Wright Central Ins. 502, 509, 1025, 1030, 1490; Paramino Lumber Marshall, 309 370, 60 600, 84 814. Judcial 379: writ State, authorized law bankruptcy.' Porter Lee, 328 1096; Dicken, 1094; 510,

Category: 8