Barenblatt v. United States
360 U.S. 109 (1959)
Relevant Case Facts: In 1953, a subcommittee of the HUAC initiated a series of hearings called “Communist Methods of Infiltration (Education). The Committee’s purpose was to investigate the “character, extent and objects” of Communist Party activities carried out by teachers loyal to the Communist Party. Francis X.T. Crowley testified before the committee and implicated his former University of Michigan roommate Lloyd Barenblatt of being a former member of a club with Communist Party links. Barenblatt was subpoenaed to testify before the committee and refused to answer some questions about his past activities and Communist Party affiliation. He was found in contempt of Congress for failing to cooperate with the committee investigation.
Issue: Did the …show more content…
5-4 (Harlan wrote for the majority).
Reasoning:
• Rule XI has a long history of use in the House of Representatives, which supports the legislature’s ability to investigate Communist activities in the name of national security. Therefore, Congress’ investigation into Communist activities was not beyond the scope of the Committee’s intended authority and purpose.
• Barenblatt was sufficiently informed of the “topic under inquiry” and was well aware of the Subcommittee’s authority and purpose for questioning him. Before Barenblatt appeared before the Subcommittee, the scope of the day’s hearings was announced, including investigating communism in education and the background of Francis X.T. Crowley. He refused to answer questions about his own Communist party affiliations, which is clearly linked to the pertinency of the Subcommittee’s work.
• The First Amendment protects a witness from self-incrimination, but does not allow a witness to avoid questioning in all cases.
• Congress has the wide power to “legislate in the field of Communist activity in this Country,” and to conduct related investigations to prevent the ultimate overthrow of the