Opinion · 1956-03-12

Cammer v. United States

Court limits judges' power to punish lawyers summarily, holding attorneys are not court 'officers' for quick contempt trials, reversing a conviction and reducing immediate judge-only penalties for lawyers.

Share

Updated 1956-03-12

Holding

The Court held that a lawyer is not the kind of court 'officer' who can be summarily tried for contempt under the federal contempt statute, and reversed the conviction and fine.

Real-world impact

  • Prevents summary judge-only contempt punishments for lawyers under §401(2).
  • Reverses conviction and $100 fine against the lawyer.
  • Leaves criminal charges for jury influence to be pursued by indictment.

Topics

lawyer rightscontempt powergrand jury biasjury influence

Summary

Background

A lawyer defended a man indicted for filing a false non-Communist affidavit and worried that many grand jurors were federal employees who might be biased. He mailed letters and questionnaires to the government-employee jurors asking about possible bias tied to the Government’s loyalty program. A district judge found the lawyer guilty of contempt under a federal statute and fined him $100; the Court of Appeals affirmed, and the case reached the high court.

Reasoning

The core question was whether a lawyer counts as one of the court’s

Opinions in this case

  1. 1.Opinion 105359
  2. 2.Opinion 9421239
  3. 3.Opinion 9421240

Ask this case

Questions, answered

Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents). Try:

  • “What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?”
  • “How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?”
  • “What are the practical implications of this ruling?”

Related Cases