Citation network
Cole Vs. Richardson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 18, 1972
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
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 676 (1972) U.S. Supreme Court Cole v. RichardsonSearch
-
U.S. 676 (1972) Cole v. RichardsonSearch
-
clause was foreclosed by Knight v. BoardSearch
-
clause, the first part of the oath, foreclosed by Knight v. BoardSearch
-
Amendments, respectively, as, for example, those relating to political beliefs. Law Students Research Council v. WadmondSearch
-
Baird v. StateSearch
-
and supporting candidates for political office. Keyishian v. BoardSearch
-
Bagett v. BullittSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Cramp v. BoardSearch
-
purposes unless one knows of the purpose and shares a specific intent to promote the illegal purpose. Whitehill v. ElkinsSearch
-
Keyishian v. BoardSearch
-
Wieman v. UpderaffSearch
-
and past activities of individuals. Law Students Research Council v. WadmondSearch
-
Page 405 U. S. 682 Bond v. FloydSearch
-
U.S. at 385 U. S. 135 . Accord, Knight v. BoardSearch
-
an oath need not parrot the exact language of the constitutional oaths to be constitutionally proper. Thus, in Ohlson v. PhillipsSearch
-
Page 405 U. S. 683 Ohlson v. PhillipsSearch
-
oath giver to actively oppose overthrow, and exactly what actions he would have to take in that respect. Cf. Ohlson v. PhillipsSearch
-
U. S. 685 raise serious questions whether the oath was so vague as to amount to a denial of due process. Connally v. GeneralSearch
-
the constitutional vice of punishment without fair warning cannot occur here. See American Communiction Assn. v. DoudsSearch
-
U. S. 413 (1950). Nor here is there any problem of the punishment inflicted by mere prosecution. See Cramp v. BoardSearch
-
by the Commonwealth. Cole v. RichardsonSearch
-
Panhandle Oil Co. v. KnoxSearch
-
Court that require a hearing before discharge for failure to take an oath involved impermissible oaths. In Slochower v. BoardSearch
-
right from which the State could not draw any rational inference of disloyalty. Appellee relies on Nostrand v. LittleSearch
-
U. S. 474 (1960), and Connell v. HigginbothamSearch
-
Richardson v. ColeSearch
-
is plainly unconstitutional by our decisions. See Board of Education v. BarnetteSearch
-
is within the protection of the First Amendment even when it is restrictively construed. In Brandenburg v. OhioSearch
-
Id. at 395 U. S. 447 . The same idea was put in somewhat different words in Noto v. UnitedSearch
-
Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
When used to shackle the mind they are, or at least they should be, unspeakably odious to a free people. Wieman v. UpdegraffSearch
-
U. S. 183 , 344 U. S. 193 (Black, J., concurring). And see Speiser v. RandallSearch
-
Yates v. UnitedSearch
-
no evidence of a legislative intent to separate the two clausees of the oath. This case is thus governed by Pedlosky v. MassachusettsSearch
-
U. S. 54 , 389 U. S. 59 (1967). See also Connally v. GeneralSearch
-
Cline v. FrinkSearch
-
Lanzetta v. NewSearch
-
Garrity v. NewSearch
-
Cf. Brandenburg v. OhioSearch
-
Dennis v. UnitedSearch
-
fine. Page 405 U. S. 695 In concluding that this oath is vague, I rely on Baggett v. BullittSearch
-
evil than negative oaths requiring a disaffirmance of political ties, group affiliations, or beliefs. Compare Connell v. HigginbothamSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial