Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Cohen Vs. Hurley

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 24, 1961

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

68 entries 5 linked 63 unlinked
Show
  1. Palko Vs. Connecticut US Supreme Court · Dec 06, 1937
  2. Adamson Vs. California US Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1947
  3. Knapp Vs. Schweitzer US Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1958
  4. Lerner Vs. Casey US Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1958
  5. Leedom Vs. Kyne US Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1958
  6. U.S. 117 (1961) U.S. Supreme Court Cohen v. Hurley
    Search
  7. U.S. 117 (1961) Cohen v. Hurley
    Search
  8. and it did not deprive him of liberty without due process of law contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment. Konigsberg v. State
    Search
  9. Judicial Inquiry which this Court had before it in Anonymous Nos. 6 and 7 v. Baker
    Search
  10. that a State may not arbitrarily refuse a person permission to Page 366 U. S. 123 practice law, Konigsberg v. State
    Search
  11. Schware v. Board
    Search
  12. not upon any unfavorable inference which it drew from petitioner's assertion of the privilege, cf. Slochower v. Board
    Search
  13. Grunewald v. United
    Search
  14. an officer of the court, and, like the court itself, an instrument . . . of justice' (citing People ex rel. Karlin v. Culkin
    Search
  15. to cooperate. Such 'cooperation' is a 'phrase without reality' as Chief Judge Cardozo wrote in People ex rel. Karlin v. Culkin
    Search
  16. Karlin v. Culkin
    Search
  17. however, was explicitly rejected by this Court, upon the fullest consideration, more than fifty years ago, Twining v. New
    Search
  18. See Snyder v. Massachusetts
    Search
  19. Brown v. Mississippi
    Search
  20. Boyd v. United
    Search
  21. issue of whether the state executive department is contracting in accordance with applicable state law. Cf. Perkins v. Lukens
    Search
  22. U. S. 131 guaranteed to professional employees in other situations. Compare Switchmen's Union of North America v. National
    Search
  23. Mediation Board, 320 U. S. 297 , with Leedom v. Kyne
    Search
  24. may be protected against a contempt sanction by a state or federal privilege against self-incrimination. Cf. Lerner v. Casey
    Search
  25. course, settled that a Fifth Amendment privilege was not available to petitioner in the present case. See, e.g., Knapp v. Schweitzer
    Search
  26. the State from exacting petitioner's testimony and attaching consequences to his refusal to respond. Cf. Adamson v. California
    Search
  27. Twining v. New
    Search
  28. the settlement of this country. This test was adopted by the court, speaking through Mr Justice Curtis, in Murray v. Hoboken
    Search
  29. into suspected unethical practices among members of the legal profession in and around New York City. In Anonymous v. Baker
    Search
  30. only 10 years ago, a different majority of this Court upheld summary imprisonment of the defense counsel in Dennis v. United
    Search
  31. the inquiry could constitutionally be deprived of a public hearing and the assistance of counsel. But cf. Chambers v. Florida
    Search
  32. the violation which I think has occurred with respect to petitioner's rights under the Fifth Amendment. Cf. Boynton v. Virginia
    Search
  33. U. S. 468 . Beilan v. Board
    Search
  34. Nelson v. County
    Search
  35. by any countervailing governmental interest. See, e.g., Nelson v. County
    Search
  36. process have been set out at length in the companion cases, Konigsberg v. State
    Search
  37. Wilkinson v. United
    Search
  38. Braden v. United
    Search
  39. Times Film Corp. v. City
    Search
  40. Barenblatt v. United
    Search
  41. It is true that some inroads have already been made into the Fifth Amendment, for both Lerner v. Casey
    Search
  42. supra, and Nelson v. County
    Search
  43. conclusion is reached primarily on the basis of agreement with the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Harlan in Twining v. New
    Search
  44. Dartmouth College v. Woodward
    Search
  45. Wheat. 518, 581. See also Vanzant v. Waddel
    Search
  46. York also singles out other groups for special treatment with regard to certain constitutional privileges. See Barsky v. Board
    Search
  47. U.S. Supreme Court Cohen v. Hurley
    Search
  48. the Fourteenth Amendment. Konigsberg v. State
    Search
  49. Konigsberg v. State
    Search
  50. Slochower v. Board
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial