Schick v. Reed - Significance, The Lower Court Rulings, The President Can Commute With Conditions, Furman V. Georgia Did Not Apply
George J. Reed
That President Eisenhower's decision to commute Schick's death sentence on the condition that he never be granted parole was unconstitutional.
Chief Lawyer for Peitioner
Homer E. Moyer, Jr.
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Louis F. Claiborne
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall
Date of Decision
23 December 1974
Eisenhower's no-parole condition did not violate the Constitution.
The Supreme Court Ruling
On 23 December 1974 the Supreme Court issued its decision. By a vote of 6-3, it affirmed the ruling of the court of appeals. Chief Justice Burger wrote the majority opinion, in which he was joined by Justices White, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell, and Rehnquist. Justice Marshall wrote a dissenting opinion, in which he was joined by Justices Douglas and Brennan. The majority's decision rested on three points.
No Parole Condition Held To Be Constitutional
Schick had argued that a condition denying him parole was itself unconstitutional. Chief Justice Burger dismissed this argument out of hand:
The no-parole condition attached to the commutation of his death sentence is similar to sanctions imposed by legislatures such as mandatory minimum sentences or statutes otherwise precluding parole; it does not offend the Constitution.
- Ex parte Grossman, 267 U.S. 87 (1925).
- Grosjean v. American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 (1936).
- Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958).
- Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
- Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, eds. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
- Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986.
- Schlesinger v. Ballard - Significance, Lieutenant Ballard Receives A Mandatory Discharge, Frontiero And Reed Offer A Guide--and A Contrast
- et al. v. Rodriguez San Antonio School District et al. - Significance, Background, Edgewood V. Alamo Heights, What Happened, Further Readings
- Schick v. Reed - Significance
- Schick v. Reed - The Lower Court Rulings
- Schick v. Reed - The President Can Commute With Conditions
- Schick v. Reed - Furman V. Georgia Did Not Apply
- Schick v. Reed - Presidential Pardoning Power
- Other Free Encyclopedias