Document: 360 U.S. 240 79 S.Ct. 1001 3 L.Ed.2d 1205 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, Petitioner,v.ALABAMA ex rel. John PATTERSON. Petitioner, v. Honorable J. Ed LIVINGSTON, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Alabama, etal. Nos. 753, 674, Misc. Decided June 8, 1959. Rehearing Denied Oct. 12, See 80 43. Messrs.Rob ert L. Carter, Thurgood Marshall, Arthur D. Shores, William T. Coleman, Jr., George E. C. Hayes, R. Ming, James M. Nabrit, Louis H. Pollak, Frank Reeves and Taylor, for petitioner. Messrs. MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen. W. Webb, Asst. Gen., respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner a writ certiorari is granted. 2 In our original opinion in this case, 357 449, 78 1163, 1488, we held Alabama judgment civil contempt against petitioner, together with $100,000 fine which it carried, constitutionally impermissible circumstances disclosed by record. We declined, however, to review trial court's restraining order prohibiting from engaging further activities State, that then not being properly before us. at pages 466—467, 1173—1174. Our mandate, issued on August 1, 1958, accordingly remanded case 'for proceedings inconsistent with' opinion. due course moved mandate be forwarded Circuit Montgomery County were left open decision. After motion had been twice renewed1 February 1959, 'again affirmed' adjudication set aside.2 Finding determined failed 'produce documents described' its production order, State concluded was 'mistaken' considering that, except refusal provide membership lists, complied, or tendered satisfactory compliance, such order. This conclusion considered as 'necessitating another affirmance (contempt) judgment,' involving, so thought, matters covered Court. 4 have reviewed petition, response all briefs record filed here former proceedings. Petitioner there claimed satisfactorily complied did deny. fact, aside procedural point, both papers posed one identical question, namely, 'the constitutional right refuse produce records relevant issues judicial proceeding party, mere speculation these members may exposed economic social sanctions private citizens because their membership?' (State's Brief Opposition Petition Certiorari, p. .)3 made even an indication other portions and, therefore, required affirmance. On contrary, phase relied entirely petitioner's furnish 'records membership.' That also basis issue briefed argued us sides after view underlay Court's 'apparently lists,' U.S., page 465, 1173.4 And premise disposed case. plainly accepted presented argument it, seek rehearing suggest clarification correction regard. 5 It now first time says 'has never agreed, does agree, has exception membership. respondent, specifically denies produced offered aspects lists denial comes too late. bound previously taken position, decision sole question regarding dispositive whole 6 take evidently acquainted detailed consequent ground defined disposition. was, held, obliged items included having compliance denied claim, true.5 7 foreclosed re-examining grounds 'Whatever Court, of, finally settled.' Sibbald United States, 12 Pet. 488, 492, 9 L.Ed. 1167. Martin Hunter's Lessee, Wheat. 304, 97; Tyler Magwire, 17 Wall. 253, 21 576. 8 requires reversed. Upon if appears necessary, court may, course, require items, earlier opinion, appropriate, reasonable under appearing. assume thus advised, will fail proceed promptly disposition proceedings, 1173—1174, deny application No. Misc., mandamus. 10 ordered. 11 Certiorari granted; reversed, mandamus denied. Mr. STEWART took no part consideration Petitioner's November 5, renewed, 19, December mailing Attorney General filing copies original. previous based, lie merits adjudication, dismissed petition ground, 265 Ala. 349, 91 So.2d 214. Its present are based includes statement: 'Lest misapprehension bench bar reaffirm well recognized uniform pronouncements respect functions limitations common-law certiorari, distinctions between methods review. 214, supra. As stated American Federation Municipal Employees Dawkins, 268 13, 104 827, 834: 'We cannot hurdle make shipwreck known rules procedure accommodate single case." 531, 532, 109 138—139. Question I follows: 'Whether names addresses protected Fourteenth Amendment's interdiction state inferference First Amendment rights?' Note infra. Indeed claim would raised additional serious issues. noted only carried proportions, but law effect foreclosing 'petitioner obtaining hearing underlying ouster action, taking any steps dissolve temporary parte, until purged itself contempt.' 454, Yet upon facts record, validity decree carrying consequences would, apart depended nothing more substantial than reasonableness degree compliance. For example, Item '5' called for: 'All files, letters, telegrams correspondence, dated occurring within last twelve months next preceding date injunction, pertaining National Association Advancement Colored People, Inc., persons, corporations, associations, groups, chapters partnerships Alabama.' tender this: files offices respondent (petitioner) subject matter headings. Therefore, comply paragraph search secure information requested. Respondent receives correspondence rate 50,000 letters alone per year maintained period ten years. produces, memoranda branches during precedig J une 1956, include

Category: 8