Citation network
In Re Stolar
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 23, 1971
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
-
him admission to the Ohio bar simply because he declined to answer questions about his beliefs and associations. Baird v. StateSearch
-
U. S. 27 -31. MR. JUSTICE STEWART concluded that Questions 7 and 13 are unconstitutional under Shelton v. TuckerSearch
-
U. S. 479 , and that Question 12(g), like Question 27 in Baird v. StateSearch
-
which drew its name from Senator Joseph McCarthy from Wisconsin. We have just referred in our opinion in Baird v. StateSearch
-
Bar applicant to answer these questions is impermissible in light of the First Amendment, as was made clear in Shelton v. TuckerSearch
-
profession are encouraged to protect their future by shunning unpopular or controversial organizations. Cf. Speiser v. RandallSearch
-
penalizing an applicant by denying him admission to the Bar solely because of his membership in an organization. Baird v. StateSearch
-
United States v. RobelSearch
-
Keyishian v. BoardSearch
-
See Cantwell v. ConnecticutSearch
-
Baird v. StateSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
prohibits Ohio from penalizing a man solely because he is a member of a particular organization. See also Baird v. StateSearch
-
question which sweeps so broadly into areas of belief and association protected against government invasion. Cantwell v. ConnecticutSearch
-
s part that even suggests a possible reason for denying his application. Page 401 U. S. 31 Here, as in Baird v. StateSearch
-
The other is No. 15, Baird v. StateSearch
-
Bar of Arizona, ante, p. 401 U. S. 1 . Cf. No. 49, Law Students Civil Rights Research Council v. WadmondSearch
-
JUSTICE STEWART, concurring in the judgment. Ohio's Questions 7 and 13 are plainly unconstitutional under Shelton v. TuckerSearch
-
In addition, Question 12(g) suffers from the same constitutional deficiency as does Arizona's Question 27 in Baird v. StateSearch
-
in the State of New York, but now finds himself thwarted in a like endeavor in Ohio. The decisions in Konigsberg v. StateSearch
-
hesitation in New York in 1968, was seriously questioned subsequently in Law Students Civil Rights Research Council v. WadmondSearch
-
Questions 13 and 7, are improper and impermissible under the Court's holding, by another five-to-four vote, in Shelton v. TuckerSearch
-
position with respect to a refusal to respond to a question such as Question 12(g) is set forth in my dissent in Baird v. StateSearch
-
test which has been applied in some First Amendment cases, see NAACP v. AlabamaSearch
-
of the Bar is threatened unless this Court steps in and puts a constitutional end to such a practice. Cf. Bates v. LittleSearch
-
Barenblatt v. UnitedSearch
-
Cf. Speiser v. RandallSearch
-
Law Students Civil Rights Research Council v. WadmondSearch
-
Konigsberg v. StateSearch
-
NAACP v. AlabamaSearch
-
Cf. Bates v. LittleSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial