50 U.S.C. § 782
Repealed. Pub. L. 103–199, title VIII, § 803(1), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2329
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases, 1951–1971 · leading case: United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967).
United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967). “" 50 U. S. C. § 782 (7). And § 5 (b) grants the Secretary of Defense untrammelled discretion to designate as a "defense facility" any facility "with respect to the operation of which he finds and determines that the security of the United States requires .”
Communist Party of United States v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 367 U.S. 1 (1961). “987 , 989, 50 U. S. C. § 782 (4)) *170 or a "Communist-infiltrated organization" ( 68 Stat.”
W. E. B. DuBois Clubs of Am. v. Clark, 389 U.S. 309 (1968). “50 U. S. C. § 782 (4). A Communist-front organization, as defined, is not a group engaged in action but in advocacy; or if action is included, so is advocacy, for § 781 (15) in describing the growth of the Communist movement speaks of those who seek "converts far and wide by an…”
McGautha v. California, 402 U.S. 183 (1971). “[28] Similarly, the Congress resolved what was certainly one of the most delicate and complex questions before it in recent yearsthe extent, if any, to which the national interest warranted federal regulation of organizations, including political parties, infiltrated by,…”
Aptheker v. Sec'y of State, 378 U.S. 500 (1964). “777 , 50 U. S. C. § 782 . [2] Section 6 (b) provides that: "When an organization is registered, or there is in effect a final order of the Board requiring an organization to register, as a Communist-action organization, it shall be unlawful for any officer or employee of the…”
United States v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437 (1965). “989 , 50 U. S. C. § 782 (1958 ed.). A majority of the Court rejected the argument that the Act was a bill of attainder, reasoning that § 3 does not specify the persons or groups upon which the deprivations set forth in the Act are to be imposed, but instead sets forth a general…”
Vets. of Abraham Lincoln Brigade v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 380 U.S. 513 (1965). “The Court of Appeals, which sustained the Subversive Activities Control Board in finding that petitioner is a "Communist-front organization" within the meaning of § 3 (4) of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, as amended, 64 Stat.”
Am. Comm. for Prot. of Foreign Born v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 380 U.S. 503 (1965). “989 , 50 U. S. C. § 782 (4) (1958 ed.). In Communist Party of the United States v.”
Nat'l Council of Am.-Soviet Friendship, Inc. v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 322 F.2d 375 (D.C. Cir. 1963). “, that the organization was at the time of the hearing substantially directed, dominated or controlled by a Communist-action organization, a Communist foreign government, or the world Communist movement.”
Jefferson Sch. of Soc. Sci. v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 331 F.2d 76 (D.C. Cir. 1963). “” Subversive Activities Control Act § 3(2), 50 U.S.C. § 782 (2). . Report of the Board on Remand at 4-5.”
Vets. of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 331 F.2d 64 (D.C. Cir. 1964). “987 , 989, as amended, 50 U.S.C. § 782 (4). . 116 U.S.App.D.C. 151 , 322 F.”
Communist Party of the United States of Am. v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 254 F.2d 314 (D.C. Cir. 1958). “989 , 50 U.S.C.A. § 782 (3) (a). 5 . 64 Stat. 999 , 50 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.