Document: 368 U.S. 208 82 S.Ct. 289 7 L.Ed.2d 240 ST. REGIS PAPER COMPANY, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 47. Argued Nov. 9, 1961. Decided Dec. 11, Rehearing Denied Jan. 15, 1962. See 972, 437. [Syllabus from pages 208-210 intentionally omitted] Horace R. Lamb, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Archibald Cox, Sol. Gen., respondent. Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Pursuant to § 6(b) Federal Trade Commission Act,1 issued orders directing petitioner and corporations acquired by it submit various reports. Petitioner failed furnish all requested information, United States at request brought present suit in District Court seeking (1) a mandatory injunction compel compliance with orders2 (2) statutory forfeiture $100 every day was default those directed specifically it.3 2 The found that some requests were unenforceable because vagueness others had been answered either or reference materials previously furnished. answer remaining items, including calling file copies census However, too vague be enforced, did not award forfeitures. 181 F.Supp. 862. Appeals affirmed insofar as ordered compliance, but reversed portion decision refusing 285 F.2d 607. We granted limited writ certiorari conflict circuits on question compulsory production reports general importance certain other questions administration investigatory provisions Act. 365 857, 81 825, 5 822. On motion petitioner, we also stay tolling further running accumulation forfeitures awaiting our decision. now affirm judgment Appeals. 3 contends cannot lawfully required produce made Census Bureau their confidential nature. remainder inquiries enforceable are contested As forfeitures, advances several arguments: 10 is applicable applies only failure 'reports' while called answers specific questions; No can imposed partially enforceable; (3) It denial due process assess penalties obey during time without remedy test validity. I. 4 controversy culminating this litigation its inception September 1956. At voluntarily information concerning corporate acquisitions enable determine whether there any violations antitrust laws. A year later, having obtain bulk requests, served subpoena duces tecum covered somewhat same but, addition, similar data three more effected interim. In fully complied subpoena, hearing before Examiner concluded. After reviewing material, however, needed additional June 1958 petitioner's counsel it. exchange correspondence between Commission's staff followed. Counsel contended, inter alia, no statement necessity therefor. Upon counsel's insistence, separate levels authority Commission, local attorney New York City Director Investigation explained need advised therefor authorized comply therewith. This discussion continued over six months which furnished two documents many requested. January 6, 1959, instigated formal investigation preceding five years. requiring filing within 30 days 'special reports' contain specified documents. temporarily suspended these considered they vacated. May vacate denied, 28, 1959. 4, broadened cover occurring after instigation investigation. Accordingly issued. set orders, notices 20, July 24, respectively. complaint filed years inquiry opened. sought would nine orders. claimed respond numbered 7, seven rather than II. Among items enforced still refuses Bureau. claims each confidential. There Courts Appeal point.4 Here both have held restricted, conclusion agree. 6 Petitioner's claim based §§ 8 9(a) Act, 13 U.S.C. 8—9(a), U.S.C.A. 8, 9(a), assurances confidentiality Government. noted immediately does way support position. section grants Secretary Commerce discretion named authorities taken censuses population, agriculture housing. Subsection (c) thereof provides when furnishes such shall '(i)n case' used recipient 'to detriment persons whom relates.' Not has Secretary, involved relate particular section, so clearly inapplicable here. prohibitions apply officers employees Department Commerce. Each them prohibited using supplied statistical purposes; and, making publication wherein name identity furnishing revealed; finally, permitting anyone outside employ 'examine individual filed.5 form report provided marked 'Confidential' addition states '(i)t purposes taxation, regulation.'6 reporting copy form, one 'Keep your files,' said companies appears Presidential Proclamation admonished '(t)he nothing do * enforcement national, state, law ordinance. fear disclosure will regarding person his affairs. For protection rights interests employee prohibited, under heavy penalty, disclosing may thus come knowledge.'7 relies upon an Attorney General, 36 Op.Atty.Gen. 362 (1930). Similar contentions Seventh Circuit Comm. v. Dilger, 276 739 (1960), where 'assurances constitute pledge good faith part Congress, President given word should permitted keep it.' F.2d, 744. concludes since original indirectly directly.' Id., 743. 9 Solicitor General case waived point submitting like herein. Reaching merits issue he points out government agencies loggerheads problem, Commerce, Budget believe subject legal process, Antitrust Division Justice, suit, contend contrary. 'fully recognizing delicate balance opposing considerations,' concluded 'on balance' compulsive production. noted, seen, against contained run officials receiving purport generally clothe secrecy. admits 'literally construed' restrictions statute go further. But insists purpose encourage free full submission Bureau, accomplished through creation relationship extend privilege companies. language President, supra, gives meaning it; nor legend forms advice coverage Cf. State California, 332 19, 39 40, 67 1658, 1668—1669, 91 L.Ed. 1889 (1947); Stewart, 311 60, 70, 61 102, 108, 85 40 (1940); Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 150, 225 227, 60 811, 846, 84 1129 (1940). realize public rewrite require grant hands immunity process. Ours duty avoid construction suppress otherwise competent evidence unless statute, strictly construed, requires result. That do. Congress prohibit use per se merely restricted htem, i.e., officials. Indeed, intended so. 45 41, 41,8 49 320(f), 320(f).9 Moreover, although tax returns, reports, bureau, Internal Revenue Code 1954, 6103 7213(a), 26 6103, taxpayer discovery.10 Likewise Criminal Code, 18 1905, 1905,11 prohibits federal trade secrets business received course official duties, obtainable company's files personnel judicial 11 buttressed fact though relieved Commission. Act providing 'shall deemed revoke impair agency respect collection release information.' 132, 132. appears, therefore, special could supply identical files. Hence securing retained obtaining already prepared power records. III. 12 next 'answers writing questions' distinguished provision penalizing 'any annual include phrase is, inapplicable. here nature reports,' designated issuance. Examination means proves error, practically details organization operation, documents, etc. stated, 'the cumulative effect substantially report.' 615. 14 While true, denied instances contemplated. disqualify being elaborates 15 source power, 6(b), see note 1, authorizes order 'annual special, questions.' Since 10, 3, refers report,' argues corporation failing give questions,' quite distinct if true penalty deliberately refused lawful questions, available provision. Thus forfeiture. An who appear testify fine $1,000 $5,000 and/or jail sentence up interpretation whatsoever questions. force attribute anomaly Congress. Rather assume placing explicating what might report. 16 legislative history theory Both House Senate bills dealing (or Interstate House) enabling neither mentioned Committee Report version stated: 17 'The commission, (later 6(b)) deem advisable. By means, ordinary adequately disclose organization, financial condition, practices, relation corporations, obtained commission necessary.' H.R.Rep.No. 533, 63d Cong., 2d Sess. 4. first appeared Conference Report, Managers explaining modifications bill mention (although discussed changes bill). 1142, Similarly, explanation debate makes clear conference new, clarifying phraseology (with exceptions relevant here). 51 Cong.Rec. 14768—14769. If separate, new included bill, surely managers. 19 Finally, empowers particularize tend objections vagueness. particularized—items 1(h); 3(j), (k); 5(j), 6(j); 7(j); 8(j); (a)—(1) order; item seventh order—were struck down unenforceable. Such specificity place company difficult position, leading expensive time-consuming well frustrating attempt information. IV. 20 'partially defective,' valid reason challenging them, therefore accrued. supports holding asserting Court, Bowman Dairy Co. States, 341 214, 71 675, 95 879 (1951), noncompliance defective disagreed, occurred daily began notice orders.12 agree conclude single runs until date stay, February 21 figures relative percentage analysis restrict consideration 134 therein. Prior 63 remained unanswered. trial judge unenforceable, leaving 53 answered. takes above figures, 37% court, Government's two-thirds unanswered off mathematical formula. record 'a involving oversight honest mistake order.' 614. Nor, concurring found, 'such extensive invalidity longer intelligible requirement' 616. 22 asserts even partial prevents application provision, arguing controlled rule supra. 'one contempt bad.' U.S., 221, 679. apart facts. defendant appeal order, able challenge disobeying appealing conviction. review conviction—the defendant's opportunity validity order—that barred punishment. delayed accrual pending determination accrue, infra. attempting procedures defined large parts heard complain defiance error. 23 finding invalid, stricken ones wished proceed inquiry. court 6(c) Administrative Procedure Stat. 241, 1005(c), procedure followed, ordering compliance. directs sustain subpena demand extent accordance *.' Nor substance contention treated subpoenas solely action. severable, court's substitution F.T.C.A. authorizing obedience remanded apply. once accrued, open remand V. 24 final impose deprive property law. argument premise judicially reviewable except risk paying accumulating throughout period noncompliance, review. consider length try prior commencement action Government, seek begun. inaction reliance Claire Furnace 274 160, 47 553, 978 (1927). misplaced. restraining enforcing done here, forwarded enforcement. properly lie subjects suffer injury Chief Taft said, 'Until acts, defendants suffer, act, promptly contest legality prejudicial proceeding them.' 174, 556. 25 then went Appeals.13 entry itself relief accrue instead ofwaiting sue thier collection. Morton Salt 338 632, 654, 70 ,S.Ct. 357, 369, 94 401 (1950), 'we say courts powerless' act suspect ruinous sustained 'whether Declaratory Judgments 28 2201, 2202, equitable powers afford shown wrong, consequences chance reasonable matter comes now, pursued none remedies, 'no chance' prevent L. A. Tucker Truck Lines, 344 33, 37, 73 67, 69, 97 54 (1952); Natural Gas Pipeline America Slattery, 302 300, 310, 58 199, 204, (1937). note, 'In actual jurisdiction ocurt declare interested party declaration sufficient meet needs. forgive legally attach grounds strike down, affirmed. 27 Affirmed. BLACK, WHITTAKER STEWART concur, dissenting. 29 I dissent Court' submitted privileged refusal asked must pay time, future penalties. First. Section Court's opinion, officer bureau thereof, purposes, make coming establishment it, permit examine very step towards regulation told petitioner: 31 'Your sworn access regulation.' 32 backed promises proclamation stated unequivocally: 'No harmed required.' 46 3011, 3012. 'These Commerce.' 739, 33 emphasizes, promised kdeep purely confidential, literally words never kept promise holds that, Government expressly bind actions take solemn comprehensive secrecy honored. promises, fairly indicate scope afforded 'for regulation' originals alone. engage activities protected. Quite plainly, governmental 'taxation, generally, protect integrity promise, necessary arms engaged bound pledges. Our not, picayunish haggling which, fair construction, arm less morals turn square corners people Rock Island, Arkansas & Louisiana 254 141, 143, 41 55, 56, 65 188. 34 Second. penalized along voluminous propounded Many run. substantial number understand otherwise. So far concerned, reasonably felt obligation numerous position correct Dilger case, decided just weeks case. All plainly shows, think, regard sought, indeed serious, good-faith disclosure. Under circumstances imposed. universal laws imposing kind strictly, expansively, construed. Applying standard, am sure rests construed justify all. 35 reverse judgment. power— '(b) To require, commerce, excepting banks, common carriers regulate class respectively, prescribe business, conduct, management, partnerships, individuals respective writing. oath, otherwise, prescribe, commission.' 38 721, 46(b), 46(b). '(u)pon district writs mandamus commanding (of Act) pursuance thereof.' 722, 49, 49. provides: 'That neglect refuse attend testify, inquiry, documentary evidence, so, requirement guilty offense conviction punished $5,000, imprisonment year, imprisonment. 'Any willfully make, cause made, false (this Act,) account, record, memorandum sections, fail full, entries accounts, records, memoranda facts transactions appertaining corporation, remove mutilate, alter, falsify agents, inspection taking copies, possession control, subject, jurisdiction, term years, 'If fixed same, continue thirty default, forfeit sum continuance failure, payable into Treasury recoverable civil principal office business. attorneys, direction prosecute recovery costs expenses prosecution paid appropriation States. authority, misdemeanor, exceeding court.' 723, 50, 50. Compare (C.A.7th Cir. 1960), St. Regis Paper 607 (C.A.2d 1960). 'Information confidential; exception. '(a) Neither may, title— '(1) title supplied; '(2) whereby identified; '(3) reports.' 9(a). 'CONFIDENTIAL.—This approved August 31, 1954 (13 131 224 224)). Your Hoover, November 22, 1929, admitted damages growing investigation.' 351, 41. '(f) motor carrier accident arising operations carrier, pursuant accident, purpose, 320(f). E.g., O'Mara, 122 399 (D.C.D.C.1954). Contra, O'Connell Olsen Ugelstadt, F.R.D. 142, 143 (E.D.N.D.Ohio 1949). 'Whoever, department publishes, divulges, discloses, known manner him employment duties examination by, return, with, concerns relates secrets, processes, operations, style work, apparatus, identity, data, amount income, profits, losses, expenditures person, firm, partnership, association; permits income return book containing abstract particulars seen examined law; fined $1,000, imprisoned both; removed employment.' 1905. second supplementary, unsuccessfully moved postponement effective Coming did, abuse discretion. Virginian 272 658, 222, 463 (1926). Furthermore, short thereafter stayed petition granted. different presented. action, judgment, reviewed

Category: 4