Bond v. Floyd

Bond v. Floyd
Bond v. Floyd
	Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 10, 1966; Decided December 5, 1966
Full case name	Bond, et al. v. Floyd, et al.
Citations	385 U.S. 116 (more) 87 S. Ct. 339; 17 L. Ed. 2d 235; 1966 U.S. LEXIS 75
Holding
	Though a State may impose all oath requirement on legislators, it cannot limit their capacity to express views on local or national policy.
Court membership
	Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas; Tom C. Clark · John M. Harlan II; William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart; Byron White · Abe Fortas
Case opinion
Majority	Warren, joined unanimously
Laws applied
	U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV

Bond v. Floyd, 385 U.S. 116 (1966), was a United States Supreme Court case.

Background

Julian Bond, an African American, was elected to the Georgia House of Representatives in June 1965. Bond was a member of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) which opposed the Vietnam War. After election, during a news interview, Bond endorsed the SNCC's views, and stated that he did not support the war, and, as a pacifist, he was opposed to all war. Members of the Georgia House of Representatives objected to Bond's statements, and petitioned to prohibit him from joining the House. A hearing was held, and Bond repeated his pacifist viewpoints, but maintained that he never urged draft card burning or other law violations. The House committee voted to prohibit Bond from joining the House.

Bond sued in federal court, but the District Court upheld the House, concluding that Bond's remarks exceeded criticism of national policy and that he could not in good faith take an oath to support the State and Federal Constitutions. Bond appealed to the Supreme Court.

Opinion of the Court

The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, ordered the Georgia House of Representatives to permit Bond to take his seat. The Court held:

Though a State may impose oath requirements on legislators, it cannot limit their capacity to express views on local or national policy.
A majority of state legislators is not authorized to test the sincerity with which another duly elected legislator meets the requirement for holding office of swearing to support the Federal and State Constitutions.
The State may not apply to a legislator a First Amendment standard stricter than that applicable to a private citizen.

gollark: Some maths books I liked as a younger person.

gollark: I have a fullres version somewhere, but it shows as heptagony/hexagony in Discord fine.

gollark: You can tell it's a hyperbolic tessellation of some kind because of the... hyperbolic tessellationy look... where there are things getting smaller and smaller near the outsides.

gollark: You can actually see heptagons and hexagons if you look at it.

gollark: It means lots of things.

External links

Works related to Bond v. Floyd at Wikisource
Text of Bond v. Floyd, 385 U.S. 116 (1966) is available from: Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.