Gravel v. United States - Significance, Private Publication Not Protected, Impact

william petitioner senator debate

Petitioner

Frank Gravel, U.S. Senator

Respondent

United States

Petitioner's Claim

That a senator's aide shares the protections guaranteeing the senator freedom of speech and debate.

Chief Lawyers for Petitioner

Robert J. Reinstein and Charles L. Fishman

Chief Lawyer for the Respondent

Erwin N. Griswold, U.S. Solicitor General

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun (announced the opinion), Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)

Justices Dissenting

William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Potter Stewart

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

29 June 1972

Decision

That the privileges of the Speech or Debate Clause do extend to congressional aides, but not to activity outside the legislative process.

Related Cases

United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974).
Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund, 421 U.S. 491 (1975).
Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982).
Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (1997).

Gravel v. United States - Significance

The Supreme Court ruled that congressional aides are in fact "alter egos" of the legislators for whom they work. As such, their speech receives special protection under the Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause. The Pentagon Papers is the popular name given to a secret study done from 1967 to 1969 by a team of analysts for the U.S. Department of Defense. The 47-volume study (officially called "Hi…

Gravel v. United States - Private Publication Not Protected

The Supreme Court held against Senator Gravel on a 5-4 vote. The decision, written by Justice Blackmun, did support him on two counts, however. It upheld Gravel's contention that reading the Papers aloud in the subcommittee was protected by the Speech or Debate Clause:The Speech or Debate Clause was designed to assure a coequal branch of the government wide freedom of speech, debate, and deliberat…

Gravel v. United States - Impact

The Gravel decision has been used to determine the scope of executive and judicial immunity under the Speech or Debate Clause. The important findings in Gravel were that a congressional aid enjoys the same immunity as a Member of Congress and that the immunity under the Speech or Debate Clause is limited to legislative activity. In Stump v. Sparkman (1978) the Court held that judges are also absol…

Citing this material

Please include a link to this page if you have found this material useful for research or writing a related article. Content on this website is from high-quality, licensed material originally published in print form. You can always be sure you're reading unbiased, factual, and accurate information.

Highlight the text below, right-click, and select “copy”. Paste the link into your website, email, or any other HTML document.