Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Dennis et al. v. United States, 1950 — 340 U.S. 863 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Dennis et al. v. United States
340 U.S. 863·Supreme Court of the United States·1950
Mr. Justice Clark took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 336.
Dennis et al. v. United States.
George W. Crockett, Jr., Richard Gladstein, Abraham J. Isserman and Harry Sacher for petitioners. Solicitor General Perlman, Irving H. Saypol, Robert W. Ginnane and Irving S. Shapiro for the United States.
[MAJORITY]
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted, limited to questions 1 and 2 presented by the petition for the writ, viz.:
“1. Whether either Section 2 or Section 3 of the Smith Act, inherently or as construed and applied in the instant case, violates the First Amendment and other provisions of the Bill of Rights.
“2. Whether either Section 2 or Section 3 of the Act, inherently or as construed and applied in the instant case, violates the First and Fifth Amendments because of indefiniteness.”
Mr. Justice Clark took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.