|
(詳細はUnited States Supreme Court case relating to Eugene Dennis, General Secretary of the Communist Party USA. The Court ruled that Dennis did not have the right under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to exercise free speech, publication and assembly, if the exercise involved the creation of a plot to overthrow the government. ==Background of the case== (詳細はSmith Act. The party members who had been petitioning for socialist reforms claimed that the act violated their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and that they served no clear and present danger to the nation. The eleven petitioners were:〔Belknap (1994), p 211.〕〔Belknap (1977), p 51. Belknap (1994), p 207. Lannon, p 122. Morgan, p 314.〕 * Benjamin J. Davis – Chairman of the CPUSA's Legislative Committee * Eugene Dennis – General Secretary * John Gates – Leader of the Young Communist League * Gil Green – Member of the National Board * Gus Hall – Member of the National Board * Irving Potash – Furriers Union official * Jack Stachel * Robert G. Thompson – Lead of the New York organization * John Williamson – Member of the Central Committee * Henry Winston – Member of the National Board * Carl Winter – Lead of the Michigan organization The 1949 trial was presided over by Judge Harold Medina, a former Columbia University professor who had been a judge for only 18 months when the trial began.〔Morgan, p 314. Sabin, p 41.〕 The trial was held in the Foley Square federal courthouse in New York City, and opened on November 1, 1948; preliminary proceedings and jury selection lasted until January 17, 1949; the defendants first appeared in court on March 7; and the trial concluded on October 14, 1949.〔〔Morgan, p 315.〕 Although later trials surpassed it, in 1949 it was the longest federal trial in US history.〔〔Longer trials have been held since then, for example a 20-month trial in 1988.〕 Prosecutor John McGohey did not assert that the defendants had a specific plan to violently overthrow the US government, but rather alleged that the CPUSA's philosophy generally advocated the violent overthrow of governments.〔Belknap (1994), p 214.〕 To prove this, the prosecution proffered articles, pamphlets and books (such as ''The Communist Manifesto'') written by authors such as Karl Marx and Joseph Stalin.〔Belknap (1994), p 214. Belknap (1994), p 209.〕 The prosecution argued that the texts advocated violent revolution, and that by adopting the texts as their political foundation, the defendants were also personally guilty of advocating violent overthrow of the government.〔Belknap (1994), p 209.〕 The five attorneys who volunteered to defend the communists were familiar with leftist causes and personally supported the defendants' rights to espouse communist views. They were Abraham Isserman, George W. Crockett, Jr., Richard Gladstein, Harry Sacher, and Louis F. McCabe.〔Sabin, p 42. Attorney Maurice Sugar participated in an advisory role.〕〔"(Communist Trial Ends with 11 Guilty )", ''Life'', October 24, 1949, p 31.〕 Defendant Eugene Dennis represented himself. The ACLU was dominated by anti-communist leaders during the 1940s, and did not enthusiastically support persons indicted under the Smith Act. However, the ACLU did provide an ''amicus'' brief for the Foley Square defendants, endorsing a motion for dismissal.〔Walker, pp 185–187. However, many local affiliates of the ACLU supported communist defendants.〕 The defense employed a three-pronged strategy: First, portraying the CPUSA as a conventional political party, which promoted socialism by peaceful means; second, employing the "labor defense" tactic to attack the trial as a capitalist venture which could never provide a fair outcome to proletarian defendants; and third, using the trial as an opportunity to publicize CPUSA policies.〔Walker, p 185. Belknap (1994), p 217. Sabin, pp 44–46.〕 The defense deliberately antagonized the judge by making a large number of objections and motions,〔 which led to numerous bitter engagements between the attorneys and Judge Medina.〔Redish, p 82. Sabin, p 46.〕 Out of the chaos, an atmosphere of "mutual hostility" arose between the judge and attorneys.〔Sabin, p 46.〕 Medina came to believe that the defense attorneys were using the trial as an opportunity to publicize communist propaganda, and that they deliberately disrupted the trial using any means they could.〔Redish, p 82.〕 Judge Medina attempted to maintain order by removing defendants who were out of order. In the course of the trial, Medina sent five of the defendants to jail for outbursts. Several times in July and August, the judge held defense attorneys in contempt of court, and told them their punishment would be meted out upon conclusion of the trial.〔Martelle, p 190.〕 On October 14, 1949, after the defense rested their case, the judge gave the jury instructions to guide them in reaching a verdict. After deliberating for seven and a half hours, the jury returned guilty verdicts against all eleven defendants.〔Belknap (1994), p 221.〕 The judge sentenced ten defendants to five years' imprisonment and a $10,000 fine each ($ in dollars). 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Dennis v. United States」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|