Cold War Supreme Court: Analysing the Change in Constitutional Interpretation between Dennis v. U.S. (1951) and Yates v. U.S. (1957) By Hayden Thorne A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts in History Victoria University of Wellington 2018 1 Acknowledgement The greatest of thanks is due to my supervisor, A.Prof. Dolores Janiewski, whose support, guidance, and regular provision of chocolate made the whole process a great deal easier. This thesis would not have reached its potential without her gentle pushes to always do a better job. I am also deeply grateful to the Victoria University of Wellington Faculty of Humanities and Social Science’s Joint Research Committee, who supplied the funding for my archival research trip. This thesis would not have been possible without their assistance. The support from the university, and in particular the staff and students in the History department has been invaluable. Thanks are also due to my family and friends. My sister Bry for the regular coffee breaks which kept me sane, and Danielle for her editing and advice. To my parents, for always encouraging me to do what I love, and never suggesting that I stop studying and try to find a ‘real job’! Finally, and most importantly, to Chloe. Thank you for supporting and encouraging me; putting up with the late nights and early starts; never complaining about the lack of a stable income; for always pushing me to do more, and to do better. Without you, this thesis would never have been completed in its present form. 2 Contents Table of Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 4 Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 5 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 6 Historiography ................................................................................................................ 13 Chapter 1: Background and Red Scare Narrative ............................................................. 18 Legal Anti-Communism .............................................................................................. 18 Investigating Subversion ............................................................................................. 28 Cold War Red Scare .................................................................................................... 31 Chapter 2: The Influence of Legal Strategy ..................................................................... 35 The New York Trial .................................................................................................... 35 The Los Angeles Trial ................................................................................................. 45 Differences in legal strategies ...................................................................................... 56 Chapter 3: The Force of Circumstance............................................................................. 58 Red Scare Apex ........................................................................................................... 58 Context and the Smith Act ........................................................................................... 61 Context in Dennis and Yates ........................................................................................ 64 Hot or Cold War? ........................................................................................................ 67 Lawyers under Fire ...................................................................................................... 68 Context as a Factor ...................................................................................................... 70 Chapter 4: The Court and its Justices ............................................................................... 71 Upholding the Smith Act ............................................................................................. 72 Concurring .................................................................................................................. 78 Forceful Dissent .......................................................................................................... 82 Changes in the Court ................................................................................................... 86 Overturning Convictions ............................................................................................. 87 3 Black and Douglas....................................................................................................... 92 Status Quo Dissent ...................................................................................................... 93 Impact of Judicial Changes .......................................................................................... 95 The Aftermath ................................................................................................................. 98 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 104 Bibliography ................................................................................................................. 108 Primary Sources ........................................................................................................ 108 Secondary Sources .................................................................................................... 112 4 Table of Abbreviations (Text) Abbreviation Term ABA American Bar Association ACLU American Civil Liberties Union CPUSA Communist Party of the United States of America FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation HUAC House Un-American Activities Committee NAACP National Association for the Advancement of Colored People NLG National Lawyers Guild Table of Abbreviations (Sources) CHS California Historical Society LARC Labor Archives and Research Center at San Francisco State University NC-ACLU American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California 5 Abstract During the early Cold War, America was gripped by an intense domestic Red Scare. This thesis explores how the United States Supreme Court dealt with the Alien Registration Act (Smith Act) and the issue of freedom of speech in the context of that Red Scare. In particular, this thesis focuses on the change in interpretation which occurred between the 1951 decision in Dennis v. United States, and the 1957 decision in Yates v United States. Dennis upheld the constitutionality of the Smith Act, and upheld the convictions of eleven Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA) leaders. Yates overturned the convictions of a group of California CPUSA officials, and placed strict limitations on the use of the Smith Act in a drastic change in interpretation. This thesis aims to explore that change in interpretation by drawing on three different lines of reasoning: the impact of changes to the wider Cold War context, the impact of changes to the personnel making up the Supreme Court, and changes in legal strategy on behalf of the defendants in the two cases. To achieve this, the thesis draws on a wide range of sources, beginning with a discussion of existing literature, and moving to explore previously untapped sources from both a historic and a legal perspective. This includes looking at the records of law firms acting in both cases, analysing other Supreme Court opinions from the time, and drawing on more traditional historical sources like media coverage of various events. This thesis argues that, contrary to most existing scholarship, the change in interpretation is best explained by a multi-causal approach. The changes to the court’s makeup and changes to the context amongst which the cases occurred were only part of the reason for the change in interpretation. The impact of a change in legal strategy also played an important role in causing the Supreme Court’s change in interpretation. 6 Introduction “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree. When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.” — Oliver Wendell Holmes, Schenck v. US, 1919.1 “Free speech – the glory of our system of government – should not be sacrificed on anything less than plain and objective proof of danger that the evil advocated is imminent” — William O. Douglas, Dennis v. United States, 1951.2 “There is hope, however, that in calmer times, when present pressures, passions and fears subside, this or some later Court will restore the First Amendment liberties to the high preferred place where they belong in a free society” — Hugo Black, Dennis v. United States, 1951.3 “Doubtlessly, dictators have to stamp out causes and beliefs which they deem subversive to their evil regimes. But governmental suppression of causes and beliefs seems to me to be the very antithesis of what our Constitution stands for. The choice expressed in the First Amendment