Speiser v. Randall

Justice Clark dissented from the majority opinion. He did not agree that due process required the state of California to assume the burden of proof in this case. Furthermore, he noted that the law did not inhibit individuals' right to speak as they might wish, pointing out that the state would not take action against those who refused to sign the oath, but would simply not take any beneficial action for them. He concluded that "Refusal of the taxing sovereign's grace in order to avoid subsidizing or encouraging activity contrary to the sovereign's policy is an accepted practice."