Court Opinion

ID: 6909217
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-23 22:14:02.593787+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:06:28.153836
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
The appellant’s contentions that section 22 of the Subversive Control Act of 1950, 64 Stat. 987, 1006, is unconstitutional are sufficiently answered in Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580, 72 S.Ct. 512, 96 L.Ed. 586 and Heikkila v. Barber, 73 S.Ct. 603. On the authority of those decisions the judgment is affirmed. Our mandate will be issued forthwith.