Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1954 to 1962

Slochower v. Board of Education of New York - Significance, Court Upholds Privilege Against Self-incrimination And Reinstates Professor, The Fifth Amendment

press appellant provision decision


Harry Slochower


Board of Higher Education of the city of New York

Appellant's Claim

That a provision of the city's charter prohibiting the use by employees of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination violated his due process rights.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Ephraim S. London

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Daniel T. Scannell

Justices for the Court

Tom C. Clark (writing for the Court), John Marshall Harlan II, Stanley Forman Reed, Sherman Minton, Earl Warren

Justices Dissenting

Hugo Lafayette Black, Harold Burton, William O. Douglas, Felix Frankfurter


Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

9 April 1956


The Supreme Court found the provision unconstitutional.

Related Cases

  • Adler v. Board of Education, 342 U.S. 485 (1952).
  • Ullmann v. United States, 350 U.S. 422 (1956).


Hurwitz, Howard L. An Encyclopedic Dictionary of American History. New York: Washington Square Press, 1974.

Further Readings

  • Diamond, Sigmund. Compromised Campus: The Collaboration of Universities with the Intelligence Community, 1945-1955. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1992.
  • Ladd, Everett Carll, and Seymour Martin Lipsett. The Divided Academy: Professors and Politics. NY: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
  • Schrecker, Ellen. No Ivory Tower: McCarthyism and the Universities New York. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1986.
Speiser v. Randall - Significance, Punishing Subversive Ideas, The Burden Of Proof, Justice Clark's Dissent, Impact [next] [back] Shelton v. Tucker - Significance, Three Teachers Refuse To Comply, Other Naacp Cases, Further Readings

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or

Vote down Vote up

almost 4 years ago

this information sucked. I mean, it was able to help me a little bit, but is it going to get me an A+ in Social Studies class? Hmmm...NO! It won't! And if I don't get an A+ in the class Linda Parsley will beat my butt once again. And when I say beat my butt I mean she'll be the better man, AGAIN! So perhaps you might want to get me some better information that will help me not only pass this class but also become the Honor Roll student I'm trying to be.

Vote down Vote up

about 10 years ago

Helpful-Yes. Unbiased,factual-No. "shows how the justices have been influenced by politics and current affairs"-You cannot know this. Loaded words and phrases: "anti-communist paranoia", "Clearly there was an underlying assumption of guilt in these justices"minds, just as there had been in those of the members of the board who(that) fired Harry Slochower." (You presume to know what they think.) "HUAC" (A pejorative used by enemies of the committee. It was the House committee on Un-American Activities.) "witch hunt' "...feelings still ran high...even among members of the nation's highest tribunal." (Inside their heads again).

Vote down Vote up

over 10 years ago

thanks-this was useful