|
''Ex parte Curtis'', 106 U.S. 371 (1882), is an 8-to-1 ruling by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Act of August 15, 1876, was a constitutionally valid exercise of the enumerated powers of the United States Congress under Article One, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. The petitioner had been convicted of receiving money for political purposes in violation of the Act of August 15, 1876. The petitioner then asked the Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus. ==Majority opinion== Chief Justice Morrison Waite wrote the opinion for the majority. The constitutional grounds under which the petitioner challenged the Act were not discussed by the Court. Chief Justice Waite noted that Congress had a lengthy history of passing laws restricting the rights and privileges of civil servants, and that the constitutionality of such laws had never before been challenged. Next, Waite affirmed that Article One, Section 8 of the Constitution clearly gave Congress the power to determine for itself what was proper in the realm of reining in political corruption: :The evident purpose of Congress in all this class of enactments has been to promote efficiency and integrity in the discharge of official duties, and to maintain proper discipline in the public service. Clearly such a purpose is within the just scope of legislative power, and it is not easy to see why the act now under consideration does not come fairly within the legitimate means to such an end.〔''Ex parte Curtis,'' 106 U.S. 371, 373.〕 Waite refused to pass judgment on the validity of the writ of habeas corpus, concluding that the Supreme Court's "jurisdiction is limited to the single question of the power of the court to commit the prisoner for the act of which he has been convicted."〔''Ex parte Curtis,'' 106 U.S. 371, 375.〕 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「Ex parte Curtis」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|