SCHNEIDERMAN V. UNITED STATES 320 U.S. 118 (1943) CASE BRIEF

SCHNEIDERMAN V. UNITED STATES

320 U.S. 118 (1943)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Schneiderman (D) appealed a decision which affirmed the canceling of D's certificate of citizenship because P was a member of the Communist Party of America during five years preceding his naturalization.

FACTS: D came to this country from Russia in 1907 or 1908 when he was approximately three. In 1922, at the age of sixteen, he became a charter member of the Young Workers (now Communist) League in Los Angeles and remained a member until 1929 or 1930. In 1924, at the age of eighteen, he filed his declaration of intention to become a citizen. Later in the same year or early in 1925 he became a member of the Workers Party, the predecessor of the Communist Party of the United States. That membership has continued to the present. His petition for naturalization was filed on January 18, 1927, and his certificate of citizenship was issued on June 10, 1927, by the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. He had not been arrested or subjected to censure prior to 1927, and there is nothing in the record indicating that he was ever connected with any overt illegal or violent action or with any disturbance of any sort. A proceeding was begun on June 30, 1939 to cancel P's certificate of citizenship granted in 1927. The Government (P) had the right and the duty to set aside and cancel certificates of citizenship on the ground of 'fraud' or on the ground that they were 'illegally procured.' P alleged that D was a member of and affiliated with and believed in and supported the principles of the Workers (Communist) Party of America and the Young Workers (Communist) League of America, whose principles were opposed to the principles of the Constitution of the United States and advised, advocated and taught the overthrow of the Government, Constitution and laws of the United States by force and violence.' The complaint also charged fraudulent procurement in that P concealed his Communist affiliation from the naturalization court. At the hearing D testified that he 'believed in the essential correctness of the Marx theory as applied by the Communist Party of the United States,' that he subscribed 'to the philosophy and principles of Socialism as manifested in the writings of Lenin,' and that his understanding and interpretation of the program, principles and practice of the Party since he joined 'were and are essentially the same as those enunciated' in the Party's 1938 Constitution. He denied the charges of that the Party advocated the overthrow of the Government by force and violence. D considered membership in the Party compatible with the obligations of American citizenship. Humphreys testified against D and that D was part of the party plans to overthrow the Government by force and violence. Hynes testified that the Party wanted to overthrow the Government with force and violence. He also testified that he never saw any behavior on D's part that brought him into conflict with any law. P proceeded only on the charge of illegal procurement. The lost the administrative proceeding and then took the matter to federal court for review. The district court held that D's certificate of naturalization was illegally procured because the organizations to which D belonged were opposed to the principles of the Constitution and advised, taught and advocated the overthrow of the Government by force and violence, and therefore petitioner, 'by reason of his membership in such organizations and participation in their activities, was not 'attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same.'' The Appeals Courts agreed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner