Parties: Lathrop v. Donohue
Date: 1961-06-19
Identifiers:
Opinions:
Segment Sets:
Paragraph: 2 - The Supreme Court held that the requirement that appellant be an enrolled dues-paying member of the State Bar did not abridge his rights of freedom of association, and also that his rights to free speech were not violated because [**1828] the State Bar used his money to support legislation with which he disagreed.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: of freedom of association, and also
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 74 - That being so, I do not understand why it should become unconstitutional for the State Bar to use appellant's dues to fulfill some of the very purposes for which it was established. I am wholly unable to follow the force of reasoning which, on the one hand, denies that compulsory dues-paying membership in an Integrated Bar infringes "freedom of association," and, on the other, in effect affirms that such membership, to the extent it entails the use of a dissident member's dues for legitimate Bar purposes, infringes "freedom of speech." This is a refinement between two aspects of what, in circumstances like these, is essentially but a single facet of the "liberty" assured by the Fourteenth Amendment, see N. A. A. C. P. v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 460, [**1842] that is too subtle for me to grasp.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: infringes "freedom of association," and, on
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 77 - I see no alternative (even at the risk of being thought to labor the obvious) but to deal in turn with each of the various specific impingements on "free speech" which have been suggested or intimated to flow from the State Bar's use of an objecting member's dues for the purposes involved in this case. As I understand things, it is said that the operation of the Integrated Bar tends (1) to reduce a dissident member's "economic capacity" to espouse causes in which he believes; (2) to further governmental "establishment" of political views; (3) to threaten development of a "guild system" of closed, self-regulating professions and businesses; (4) to "drown out" the voice of dissent by requiring all members of the Bar to lend financial support to the views of the majority; and (5) to interfere with freedom of belief by causing "compelled affirmation" of majority-held views. With deference, I am bound to say that, in my view, all of these arguments border on the chimerical.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: with freedom of belief by causing
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 156 - Joining is one method of expression. This freedom of association is not an absolute. For as I have noted in my opinion in International Assn. of Machinists v. Street, ante, p. 775, decided this day, the necessities of life put us into relations with others that may be undesirable or even abhorrent, if individual standards were to obtain. Yet if this right is to be curtailed by law, if the individual is to be compelled to associate with others in a common cause, then I think exceptional circumstances should be shown. I would treat laws of this character like any that touch on First Amendment rights. Congestion of traffic, street fights, riots and such may justify curtailment of opportunities or occasions to speak freely. Cf. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568. But when those laws are sustained, we require them to be "narrowly drawn" ( Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 311) so as to be confined to the precise evil within the competence [***1228] of the legislature.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: This freedom of association is not
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 156 - The inroads of an integrated bar on the liberty and freedom of lawyers to espouse such causes as they choose was emphasized by William D. Guthrie
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: and freedom of lawyers to espouse
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 156 - The right of association is an important incident of First Amendment rights. The right to belong -- or not to belong -- is deep in the American tradition. Joining is one method of expression.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: The right of association is an
Search time: 2018-03-15 12:38:56 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef Segmenter: ars9ef
Paragraph: 75 - From a Constitutional standpoint, I think that there can be no doubt about Wisconsin's right to use appellant's dues in furtherance of any of the purposes now drawn in question. Orderly analysis requires [***1210] that there be considered, first, the respects in which it may be thought that the use of a member's dues for causes he is against impinges on his right of free speech, and second, the nature of the state interest offered to justify such use of the dues exacted from him.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: his right of free speech, and
Search time: 2018-03-15 12:38:56 Searcher: clm6u Editor: ars9ef Segmenter: ars9ef
Paragraph: 88 - This objection can be stated in either of two ways. First: The requirement of dues payments to be spent to further views to which the payor is opposed tends to increase the volume of the arguments he opposes and thereby to drown out his own voice in opposition, in violation of his Constitutional right to be heard. Second: The United States Constitution creates a scheme of federal and state governments each of which is to be elected on a one-man-one-vote basis and on a one-man-one-political-voice basis. Of course several persons may voluntarily cumulate their political voices, but no governmental force can require a single individual to contribute money to [**1845] support views to be adopted by a democratically organized group even if the individual is also free to say what he pleases separately.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: Constitutional right to be heard. Second
Search time: 2018-01-12 14:48:12 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 90 - Moreover, I do not think it can be said with any assurance that being required to contribute to the dispersion of views one opposes has a substantial limiting effect on one's right to speak and be heard. Certainly these rights would be limited if state action substantially reduced one's ability to reach his audience. But are these rights substantially affected by increasing the opposition's ability to reach the same audience? I can conceive of instances involving limited facilities, such as television time, which may go to the highest bidder, wherein increasing the resources of the opposition may tend to reduce a dissident's access to his audience. But before the Constitution comes into play, there should surely be some showing of a relationship between required financial support of the opposition and reduced ability to communicate, a showing I think hardly possible in the case of the legislative recommendations of the Wisconsin Bar. And, aside from the considerations of freedom from compelled affirmations of belief to be discussed later, I can find little basis for a right not to have one's opposition heard.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: s right to speak and be
Search time: 2018-01-12 14:48:12 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 156 - The right of association is an important incident of First Amendment rights. The right to belong -- or not to belong -- is deep in the American tradition. Joining is one method of expression. This freedom of association is not an absolute.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: The right to belong -- or not
Search time: 2018-01-12 14:48:12 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk