Gravel V. United States - Dissents

Dissents

Associate Justice Potter Stewart dissented in part, concluding that the Court had too narrowly construed the protections granted by the Speech or Debate Clause. Justice Stewart would have extended the protections of the clause to cover testimony before a grand jury about preparing for legislative acts as well.

In his dissent, Associate Justice William O. Douglas argued that the private publication was an adjunct of speech or debate function of Senator Gravel, and was therefore protected speech.

In his dissent, Associate Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. disagreed with the majority's narrow construction of the Speech or Debate Clause, and defined a much broader conception of the right. Brennan was joined by Justices Douglas and Marshall.

Read more about this topic:  Gravel V. United States

Other articles related to "dissents":

Criticisms of Substantive Due Process
... the Court was overstepping its boundaries, and the following is from one of his last dissents I have not yet adequately expressed the more than anxiety that I ... mention the doctrine, and have in their dissents often argued over how substantive due process should be employed based on Court precedent ... As propounded in his dissents in Moore v ...
State Farm V. Campbell - Dissents
... Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg voted to leave intact the decision of the Utah Supreme Court ... She expressed her view that the Supreme Court "has no warrant to reform state law governing awards of punitive damages..." She wrote that punitive damage caps should be set in place by legislatures ...
Due Process Clause - Commentary - Substantive Due Process
... its boundaries, and the following is from one of his last dissents I have not yet adequately expressed the more than anxiety that I feel at the ever increasing scope given to the Fourteenth Amendment in cutting down ... Thomas have occasionally joined Court opinions that mention the doctrine, and have in their dissents often argued over how substantive due process should be employed based on Court ... As propounded in his dissents in Moore v ...