Adamson v. California
Encyclopedia
Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 (1947) was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the incorporation
of the Fifth Amendment
of the Bill of Rights
. Its decision is part of a long line of cases that eventually led to the Selective Incorporation Doctrine.
but chose not to testify on his own behalf because he knew the prosecutor would impeach
him with questions about his prior criminal record. The prosecutor then argued that this refusal to testify could be seen as an admission of guilt under a California statute that allowed the jury
to infer guilt in such cases. On appeal, however, Adamson's attorney Morris Lavine argued that Adamson's freedom against self-incrimination
guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment
had been violated. He argued that because the prosecutor had drawn attention to Adamson’s refusal to testify, Adamson’s freedom against self-incrimination
had been violated.
written by Justice Stanley Reed
, the Supreme Court
found that while Adamson’s rights may have been violated had the case been tried in federal court
, the rights guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment did not extend to state courts based on the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
.
Reed
stated succinctly, "It is settled law that the clause of the Fifth Amendment
, protecting a person against being compelled to be a witness against himself, is not made effective by the Fourteenth Amendment
as a protection against state action on the ground that freedom from testimonial compulsion is a right of national citizenship . . . "
Reed
based the Court's decision, in part, on the Court's decision ten years early in Palko v. Connecticut
, where the Court found that the Fifth Amendment's
protection against double jeopardy
did not apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment
, and the Court's decision thirty-nine years earlier in Twining v. New Jersey
.
wrote a dissent, arguing that incorporation of the Bill of Rights
through the due process clause
of the the Fourteenth Amendment
would "tear up by the roots much of the fabric of law in the several States, and would deprive the States of opportunity for reforms in legal process designed for extending the area of freedom."
He ended:
This assertion would not carry the day, however. It was later rebuffed by a whole line of cases that did, in fact, incorporate many of the provisions of the first eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights.
, however, had strong convictions against this decision and wrote a lengthy dissenting opinion
, in which he argued for the incorporation of the first eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights.
Specifically, Black argued that while the Court should not incorporate rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights
, it should "extend to all the people of the nation the protection of [the specific enumerated rights of] the Bill of Rights."
Black's dissent--beyond advocating for incorporation--was also a criticism of the Court's use of natural law
in the arena of incorporation. First, Black thought that the Court's use of natural law in Adamson to discard the argument that the right to be free from self-incrimination should be incorporated was misguided. "I further contend that the "natural law" formula which the Court uses to reach its conclusion in this case should be abandoned as an incongruous excrescence on our Constitution. I believe that formula to be itself a violation of our Constitution, in that it subtly conveys to courts, at the expense of legislatures, ultimate power over public policies . . ." Black wrote.
Because of this belief that natural law
actually restricted the rights of citizens under the Constitution, Black also called for the overruling of Twining v. New Jersey
, where the Court turned to natural law
to support its decision. Indeed, Black thought that the Court's guiding light for incorporation, that is, asking whether the interest at stake is "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," "degraded the constitutional safeguards of the Bill of Rights, and simultaneously appropriate for this Court a broad power which [it is] not authorized by the Constitution to exercise."
agreed, in sum and substance, with Black. Yet, Murphy would have also left open the option that the Court incorporate rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights. He stated, "Occasions may arise where a proceeding falls so far short of conforming to fundamental standards of procedure as to warrant constitutional condemnation in terms of a lack of due process despite the absence of a specific provision in the Bill of Rights."
Incorporation (Bill of Rights)
The incorporation of the Bill of Rights is the process by which American courts have applied portions of the U.S. Bill of Rights to the states. Prior to the 1890s, the Bill of Rights was held only to apply to the federal government...
of the Fifth Amendment
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Its guarantees stem from English common law which traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215...
of the Bill of Rights
United States Bill of Rights
The Bill of Rights is the collective name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. These limitations serve to protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and...
. Its decision is part of a long line of cases that eventually led to the Selective Incorporation Doctrine.
Background
In Adamson v. California, Admiral Dewey Adamson was charged with first-degree murderMurder
Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human being, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide...
but chose not to testify on his own behalf because he knew the prosecutor would impeach
Witness impeachment
Witness impeachment, in the law of evidence, is the process of calling into question the credibility of an individual who is testifying in a trial...
him with questions about his prior criminal record. The prosecutor then argued that this refusal to testify could be seen as an admission of guilt under a California statute that allowed the jury
Jury
A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to ascertain the guilt, or lack thereof, in a crime. In Anglophone jurisdictions, the verdict may be guilty,...
to infer guilt in such cases. On appeal, however, Adamson's attorney Morris Lavine argued that Adamson's freedom against self-incrimination
Self-incrimination
Self-incrimination is the act of accusing oneself of a crime for which a person can then be prosecuted. Self-incrimination can occur either directly or indirectly: directly, by means of interrogation where information of a self-incriminatory nature is disclosed; indirectly, when information of a...
guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Its guarantees stem from English common law which traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215...
had been violated. He argued that because the prosecutor had drawn attention to Adamson’s refusal to testify, Adamson’s freedom against self-incrimination
Self-incrimination
Self-incrimination is the act of accusing oneself of a crime for which a person can then be prosecuted. Self-incrimination can occur either directly or indirectly: directly, by means of interrogation where information of a self-incriminatory nature is disclosed; indirectly, when information of a...
had been violated.
Court's Decision
In the majority opinionMajority opinion
In law, a majority opinion is a judicial opinion agreed to by more than half of the members of a court. A majority opinion sets forth the decision of the court and an explanation of the rationale behind the court's decision....
written by Justice Stanley Reed
Stanley Forman Reed
Stanley Forman Reed was a noted American attorney who served as United States Solicitor General from 1935 to 1938 and as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1938 to 1957. He was the last Supreme Court Justice who did not graduate from law school Stanley Forman Reed (December 31,...
, the Supreme Court
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
found that while Adamson’s rights may have been violated had the case been tried in federal court
United States federal courts
The United States federal courts make up the judiciary branch of federal government of the United States organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government.-Categories:...
, the rights guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment did not extend to state courts based on the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the Dred Scott v...
.
Reed
Stanley Forman Reed
Stanley Forman Reed was a noted American attorney who served as United States Solicitor General from 1935 to 1938 and as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1938 to 1957. He was the last Supreme Court Justice who did not graduate from law school Stanley Forman Reed (December 31,...
stated succinctly, "It is settled law that the clause of the Fifth Amendment
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Its guarantees stem from English common law which traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215...
, protecting a person against being compelled to be a witness against himself, is not made effective by the Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the Dred Scott v...
as a protection against state action on the ground that freedom from testimonial compulsion is a right of national citizenship . . . "
Reed
Stanley Forman Reed
Stanley Forman Reed was a noted American attorney who served as United States Solicitor General from 1935 to 1938 and as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1938 to 1957. He was the last Supreme Court Justice who did not graduate from law school Stanley Forman Reed (December 31,...
based the Court's decision, in part, on the Court's decision ten years early in Palko v. Connecticut
Palko v. Connecticut
Palko v. Connecticut, , was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the incorporation of the Fifth Amendment protection against double jeopardy.-Background:...
, where the Court found that the Fifth Amendment's
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Its guarantees stem from English common law which traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215...
protection against double jeopardy
Double jeopardy
Double jeopardy is a procedural defense that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same, or similar charges following a legitimate acquittal or conviction...
did not apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the Dred Scott v...
, and the Court's decision thirty-nine years earlier in Twining v. New Jersey
Twining v. New Jersey
Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78 , presented an early standard of the Supreme Court's Incorporation Doctrine by establishing that while certain rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights might apply to the states under the 14th amendment's due process clause, the 5th amendment's right against...
.
Frankfurter's dissent
Justice Felix FrankfurterFelix Frankfurter
Felix Frankfurter was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.-Early life:Frankfurter was born into a Jewish family on November 15, 1882, in Vienna, Austria, then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in Europe. He was the third of six children of Leopold and Emma Frankfurter...
wrote a dissent, arguing that incorporation of the Bill of Rights
United States Bill of Rights
The Bill of Rights is the collective name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. These limitations serve to protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and...
through the due process clause
Due process
Due process is the legal code that the state must venerate all of the legal rights that are owed to a person under the principle. Due process balances the power of the state law of the land and thus protects individual persons from it...
of the the Fourteenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the Dred Scott v...
would "tear up by the roots much of the fabric of law in the several States, and would deprive the States of opportunity for reforms in legal process designed for extending the area of freedom."
He ended:
This assertion would not carry the day, however. It was later rebuffed by a whole line of cases that did, in fact, incorporate many of the provisions of the first eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights.
Black's dissent
Justice Hugo BlackHugo Black
Hugo Lafayette Black was an American politician and jurist. A member of the Democratic Party, Black represented Alabama in the United States Senate from 1927 to 1937, and served as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1937 to 1971. Black was nominated to the Supreme...
, however, had strong convictions against this decision and wrote a lengthy dissenting opinion
Dissenting opinion
A dissenting opinion is an opinion in a legal case written by one or more judges expressing disagreement with the majority opinion of the court which gives rise to its judgment....
, in which he argued for the incorporation of the first eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights.
Specifically, Black argued that while the Court should not incorporate rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights
United States Bill of Rights
The Bill of Rights is the collective name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. These limitations serve to protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and...
, it should "extend to all the people of the nation the protection of [the specific enumerated rights of] the Bill of Rights."
Black's dissent--beyond advocating for incorporation--was also a criticism of the Court's use of natural law
Natural law
Natural law, or the law of nature , is any system of law which is purportedly determined by nature, and thus universal. Classically, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature and deduce binding rules of moral behavior. Natural law is contrasted with the positive law Natural...
in the arena of incorporation. First, Black thought that the Court's use of natural law in Adamson to discard the argument that the right to be free from self-incrimination should be incorporated was misguided. "I further contend that the "natural law" formula which the Court uses to reach its conclusion in this case should be abandoned as an incongruous excrescence on our Constitution. I believe that formula to be itself a violation of our Constitution, in that it subtly conveys to courts, at the expense of legislatures, ultimate power over public policies . . ." Black wrote.
Because of this belief that natural law
Natural law
Natural law, or the law of nature , is any system of law which is purportedly determined by nature, and thus universal. Classically, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature and deduce binding rules of moral behavior. Natural law is contrasted with the positive law Natural...
actually restricted the rights of citizens under the Constitution, Black also called for the overruling of Twining v. New Jersey
Twining v. New Jersey
Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78 , presented an early standard of the Supreme Court's Incorporation Doctrine by establishing that while certain rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights might apply to the states under the 14th amendment's due process clause, the 5th amendment's right against...
, where the Court turned to natural law
Natural law
Natural law, or the law of nature , is any system of law which is purportedly determined by nature, and thus universal. Classically, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature and deduce binding rules of moral behavior. Natural law is contrasted with the positive law Natural...
to support its decision. Indeed, Black thought that the Court's guiding light for incorporation, that is, asking whether the interest at stake is "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," "degraded the constitutional safeguards of the Bill of Rights, and simultaneously appropriate for this Court a broad power which [it is] not authorized by the Constitution to exercise."
Murphy's dissent
Justice Frank MurphyFrank Murphy
William Francis Murphy was a politician and jurist from Michigan. He served as First Assistant U.S. District Attorney, Eastern Michigan District , Recorder's Court Judge, Detroit . Mayor of Detroit , the last Governor-General of the Philippines , U.S...
agreed, in sum and substance, with Black. Yet, Murphy would have also left open the option that the Court incorporate rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights. He stated, "Occasions may arise where a proceeding falls so far short of conforming to fundamental standards of procedure as to warrant constitutional condemnation in terms of a lack of due process despite the absence of a specific provision in the Bill of Rights."