Appellants
B. T. Shelton, et al.
Appellees
Everett Tucker, et al.
Appellants' Claim
That the state of Arkansas violated the constitutional rights of personal, associational, and academic liberty by requiring teachers to disclose all theirorganizational affiliations as a condition for employment.
Chief Lawyers for Appellants
Robert L. Carter, Edwin E. Dunaway
Chief Lawyers for Appellees
Herschel H. Friday Jr, Louis L. Ramsay Jr., Robert V. Light
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Potter Stewart (writing for the Court), Earl Warren
Justices Dissenting
Tom C. Clark, Felix Frankfurter, John Marshall Harlan II, Charles Evans Whittaker
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
12 December 1960
Decision
Upheld appellants' claim.
Significance
For the second time in two years, the Court asserted an individual's implicitconstitutional right to freedom of association, a right that came under attack in the South as a backlash to the Civil Rights Movement.
Since its beginnings in 1909, the National Association for the Advancement ofColored People (NAACP) has fought for equal rights for African Americans. Founded by both blacks and whites, the NAACP helped end segregation and lobbiedfor a federal anti-lynching law. In the 1950s, its major victory came with the historic Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which outlawed so-called "separate but equal" schooling. The NAACP's legal successes and its prominence in the Civil Rights Movement made it a targetfor Southerners who opposed racial equality.
In 1958, the state of Alabama took the NAACP to court after the organizationrefused to turn over its membership list. Making the list public, the NAACP said, would endanger its members, jobs or physical safety. The Supreme Court,in National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama (1958) unanimously agreed with the NAACP, ruling that its members had a constitutional right of association. This right was implied in the First Amendment's right to freedom of assembly, and was protected from state attack by the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. This decision marked the first time the Court acknowledged this right.
The NAACP ruling, however, did not stop the attempts to single out members of that civil rights group. In 1958, Arkansas passed Article 10, a law affecting state teachers. The act said that every teacher who worked at a state-supported school or college had to list every group they had belonged or contributed money to during the previous five years. They would have to fill out a similar affidavit every year as a condition of their employment--Arkansasdid not have tenure for its teachers, so a teacher's contract was reviewed every year. In the past, laws asking about organizational ties were designed to ferret out Communists or their sympathizers, but Act 10 was specifically designed to identify teachers affiliated with the NAACP.
Three Teachers Refuse to Comply
B. T. Shelton, an African American, had taught in Arkansas schools for 25 years. He was also a member of the NAACP. Before the 1959 school year, he was asked to comply with Act 10; he refused and was fired. Two other Arkansas teachers, Max Carr and Ernest Gephardt, refused to fill out the affidavits required by Act 10, though they listed some of their memberships and agreed to answer any questions regarding their qualifications to teach. They, too, were fired. All three men contested their firings in court, saying their right to personal, associational, and academic freedom had been denied. The Arkansas courts, however, upheld Act 10 and the men appealed to the federal district court,which affirmed the state courts. The issue then went to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court did not address the civil rights implications of Shelton and the targeting of the NAACP. Instead, the Court focused on the general issue of asking all teachers for their membership affiliations, and whether it related to the state's right to hire quality teachers. In a 5-4 decision, the Court said Act 10 was too broad and therefore violated the petitioners' right of association.
Writing for the Court, Justice Stewart said " . . . there can be no questionof the relevance of a State's inquiry into the fitness and competence of itsteachers." But Act 10, he continued, went too far:
In his dissent, Justice Harlan said the right of free association is not absolute. Unlike National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v.Alabama, where the state did not have a legitimate interest in the membership information, in this instance Arkansas did: " . . . [I]nformation abouta teacher's associations may be useful to school authorities in determiningthe moral, professional, and social qualifications of the teacher . . . " Onits face, the statute was constitutional; if at a later date Arkansas used Act 10 in some discriminatory way, the Court may have reason to act.
Other NAACP Cases
A third case dealing with the NAACP and the freedom of association came threeyears after Shelton. In National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Button (1963), the Court struck down a Virginia law preventing the NAACP from providing legal support in cases it was not a partyto or in which it had no financial interest. The same year, in Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Committee, the Court overturned the contempt conviction of an NAACP official who refused to testify about members' past or current relationship with the Communist Party.
In the 1980s, freedom of association cases moved away from racial equality and turned toward sexual equality. In a series of cases, the Court ruled that some previously all-male clubs and organizations had to let women join. The Court said that in those cases, society's interest in ensuring equal treatmentof women outweighed the freedom of "expressive association"--association of people who share common values and seek to pursue a particular goal. The rulings affected the U.S. Jaycees, the Rotary Club International, and a private New York club.
Related Cases
B. T. Shelton, et al.
Appellees
Everett Tucker, et al.
Appellants' Claim
That the state of Arkansas violated the constitutional rights of personal, associational, and academic liberty by requiring teachers to disclose all theirorganizational affiliations as a condition for employment.
Chief Lawyers for Appellants
Robert L. Carter, Edwin E. Dunaway
Chief Lawyers for Appellees
Herschel H. Friday Jr, Louis L. Ramsay Jr., Robert V. Light
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Potter Stewart (writing for the Court), Earl Warren
Justices Dissenting
Tom C. Clark, Felix Frankfurter, John Marshall Harlan II, Charles Evans Whittaker
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
12 December 1960
Decision
Upheld appellants' claim.
Significance
For the second time in two years, the Court asserted an individual's implicitconstitutional right to freedom of association, a right that came under attack in the South as a backlash to the Civil Rights Movement.
Since its beginnings in 1909, the National Association for the Advancement ofColored People (NAACP) has fought for equal rights for African Americans. Founded by both blacks and whites, the NAACP helped end segregation and lobbiedfor a federal anti-lynching law. In the 1950s, its major victory came with the historic Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which outlawed so-called "separate but equal" schooling. The NAACP's legal successes and its prominence in the Civil Rights Movement made it a targetfor Southerners who opposed racial equality.
In 1958, the state of Alabama took the NAACP to court after the organizationrefused to turn over its membership list. Making the list public, the NAACP said, would endanger its members, jobs or physical safety. The Supreme Court,in National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama (1958) unanimously agreed with the NAACP, ruling that its members had a constitutional right of association. This right was implied in the First Amendment's right to freedom of assembly, and was protected from state attack by the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. This decision marked the first time the Court acknowledged this right.
The NAACP ruling, however, did not stop the attempts to single out members of that civil rights group. In 1958, Arkansas passed Article 10, a law affecting state teachers. The act said that every teacher who worked at a state-supported school or college had to list every group they had belonged or contributed money to during the previous five years. They would have to fill out a similar affidavit every year as a condition of their employment--Arkansasdid not have tenure for its teachers, so a teacher's contract was reviewed every year. In the past, laws asking about organizational ties were designed to ferret out Communists or their sympathizers, but Act 10 was specifically designed to identify teachers affiliated with the NAACP.
Three Teachers Refuse to Comply
B. T. Shelton, an African American, had taught in Arkansas schools for 25 years. He was also a member of the NAACP. Before the 1959 school year, he was asked to comply with Act 10; he refused and was fired. Two other Arkansas teachers, Max Carr and Ernest Gephardt, refused to fill out the affidavits required by Act 10, though they listed some of their memberships and agreed to answer any questions regarding their qualifications to teach. They, too, were fired. All three men contested their firings in court, saying their right to personal, associational, and academic freedom had been denied. The Arkansas courts, however, upheld Act 10 and the men appealed to the federal district court,which affirmed the state courts. The issue then went to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court did not address the civil rights implications of Shelton and the targeting of the NAACP. Instead, the Court focused on the general issue of asking all teachers for their membership affiliations, and whether it related to the state's right to hire quality teachers. In a 5-4 decision, the Court said Act 10 was too broad and therefore violated the petitioners' right of association.
Writing for the Court, Justice Stewart said " . . . there can be no questionof the relevance of a State's inquiry into the fitness and competence of itsteachers." But Act 10, he continued, went too far:
. . . [T]o compel a teacher to disclose his every associational tie is to impair that teacher's right of free association, a right closely allied to freedom of speech and a right which, like freedom of speech, lies at the foundation of a free society. Such interference with personal freedom is conspicuously accented whenthe teacher serves at the absolute will of those to whom the disclosure mustbe made . . . the pressure upon a teacher to avoid any ties which might displease those who control his professional destiny would be constant and heavy. . . Many such relationships could have no possible bearing upon the teacher's occupational competence or fitness.
In his dissent, Justice Harlan said the right of free association is not absolute. Unlike National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v.Alabama, where the state did not have a legitimate interest in the membership information, in this instance Arkansas did: " . . . [I]nformation abouta teacher's associations may be useful to school authorities in determiningthe moral, professional, and social qualifications of the teacher . . . " Onits face, the statute was constitutional; if at a later date Arkansas used Act 10 in some discriminatory way, the Court may have reason to act.
Other NAACP Cases
A third case dealing with the NAACP and the freedom of association came threeyears after Shelton. In National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Button (1963), the Court struck down a Virginia law preventing the NAACP from providing legal support in cases it was not a partyto or in which it had no financial interest. The same year, in Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Committee, the Court overturned the contempt conviction of an NAACP official who refused to testify about members' past or current relationship with the Communist Party.
In the 1980s, freedom of association cases moved away from racial equality and turned toward sexual equality. In a series of cases, the Court ruled that some previously all-male clubs and organizations had to let women join. The Court said that in those cases, society's interest in ensuring equal treatmentof women outweighed the freedom of "expressive association"--association of people who share common values and seek to pursue a particular goal. The rulings affected the U.S. Jaycees, the Rotary Club International, and a private New York club.
Related Cases
- Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
- National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama, 360 U.S. 240 (1958).
- National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963).
- Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Committee, 372 U.S. 539 (1963).
User Comments Add a comment…