Free Study Guides, Book Notes, Book Reviews & More...

Pay it forward... Tell others about Novelguide.com

A
Literary Analysis Test Prep Material Reports & Essays Studyhall Teacher Ratings Famous Inventors
Novelguide.com Novelguide.com Site Search:

New content - click here !



Novel Analysis
About Novelguide
Join Our Email List
Bookstore - Buy Books
Contact Us

Discover!
Explore!
Learn...

Studyworld.com

Novelguide
Novelguide.com is the premier free source for literary analysis on the web. We provide an educational supplement for better understanding of classic and contemporary Literature Profiles, Metaphor Analysis, Theme Analyses, and Author Biographies.



NAACP v. ALABAMA 357 U.S. 449 (1958)

In this decision the Supreme Court first recognized a FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION guaranteed by the FIRST AMENDMENT. Alabama, charging that the NAACP had failed to qualify as an out-of-state CORPORATION, had sought an INJUNCTION preventing the association from doing business in the state. In that proceeding, the state obtained an order that the NAACP produce a large number of its records. The association substantially complied, but refused to produce its membership lists. The trial court ruled the NAACP in contempt and fined it $100,000. The state supreme court denied review, and the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed.

Justice JOHN MARSHALL HARLAN wrote for the Court. First, the NAACP had STANDING to assert its members' claims; to rule otherwise would be to require an individual member to forfeit his or her political privacy in the act of claiming it. On the constitutional merits, Harlan wrote: "Effective advocacy … is undeniably enhanced by group association"; thus "state action which may have the effect of curtailing the freedom to associate is subject to the closest scrutiny." The privacy of association may be a necessary protection for the freedom to associate "where a group espouses dissident beliefs." Here, disclosure of NAACP membership in Alabama during a time of vigorous civil rights activity had been shown to result in members' being fired from their jobs, physically threatened, and otherwise harassed. Only a COMPELLING STATE INTEREST could justify this invasion of political privacy. That compelling interest was not shown here. The names of the NAACP's rank-and-file members had no substantial bearing on the state's interest in assuring compliance with its corporation law.

This same technique—solemnly accepting the state's account of its purposes, ignoring possible improper motives, and concluding that those state interests were not "compelling"—was employed in other cases involving efforts by southern states to force disclosures of NAACP membership such as Bates v. Little Rock (1960) and Shelton v. Tucker (1960).

KENNETH L. KARST
(1986)

Naacp v. Alabama 357 U.S. 449 (1958)

Copyright © 2000 by Macmillan Reference USA


Novel Analysis
About Novelguide
Join Our Email List
Bookstore - Buy Books
Contact Us





Oakwood Publishing Company:

SAT; ACT; GRE

Study Material






Copyright © 1999 - Novelguide.com. All Rights Reserved.
To print this page, please use Internet Explorer.
To cite information from this page, please cite the date when you
looked at our site and the author as Novelguide.com.
Copyright Information -- Terms Of Use -- Privacy Statement