UNITED STATES V LOVETT 328 U.S 303 1946 UNITED STATES V LOVETT U.S CONSTITUTION U.S GOV'T JUDICIAL COLD WAR U.S GOVERNMENT AND CONSTITUTION SIGNIFICANCE THIS RULING WHICH OCCURRED DURING THE HYSTERIA OF MCCARTHYISM MAINTAINED THAT SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS COULD NOT BE PUNISHED IN STATUTES BACKGROUND IN THE LATE 1940S AND EARLY 1950S FEAR OF COMMUNISM LED SOME AMERICANS TO ACCUSE OTHERS OF BEING COMMUNIST SUPPORTERS DISLOYAL TO THE UNITED STATES THESE ACCUSATIONS OFTEN HAD GRAVE CONSEQUENCES ROBERT MORSS LOVETT AND TWO OTHER FEDERAL EMPLOYEES WERE ACCUSED OF BEING DISLOYAL AND CONGRESS ENACTED A LAW THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COULD NOT PAY THEM THEIR SALARIES LOVETT AND THE OTHERS SUED ARGUING THAT THE BILL OF ATTAINDER CLAUSES IN THE U.S CONSTITUTION FORBID ANY LEGISLATIVE ACT ON EITHER FEDERAL OR STATE LEVELS THAT SUBJECTS SOMEONE TO PUNISHMENT WITHOUT A TRIAL BY JURY DECISION THIS CASE WAS ARGUED ON MAY 3 AND 6 1946 AND DECIDED ON JUNE 3 1946 BY A VOTE OF 8 TO 0 JUSTICE HUGO BLACK SPOKE FOR THE COURT WITH JUSTICES STANLEY REED AND FELIX FRANKFURTER CONCURRING AND JUSTICE ROBERT JACKSON NOT PARTICIPATING THE COURT FOUND THIS LAW TO BE A BILL OF ATTAINDER OR A VIOLATION OF CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS AND STRUCK IT DOWN EXCERPT FROM THE OPINION OF THE COURT WHEN OUR CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS WERE WRITTEN OUR ANCESTORS HAD AMPLE REASON TO KNOW THAT LEGISLATIVE TRIALS AND PUNISHMENTS WERE TOO DANGEROUS TO LIBERTY TO EXIST IN THE NATION OF FREE MEN THEY ENVISIONED AND SO THEY PROSCRIBED FORBID BILLS OF ATTAINDER MUCH AS WE REGRET TO DECLARE THAT AN ACT OF CONGRESS VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE HERE
