Gojack v. United States

Background

A man called to testify before a Subcommittee of the House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1955 answered some questions but refused others about alleged Communist Party ties, other people’s affiliations, and a “Peace Crusade.” He did not invoke the Fifth Amendment. He was indicted under the criminal contempt statute (§ 192), convicted, and sentenced after a re-indictment that said the subject was “Communist Party activities within the field of labor.” The Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Supreme Court granted review.

Reasoning

The Court held the conviction could not stand because the full Committee never properly approved or defined the subject of the inquiry as its own rules required, and the Subcommittee was not lawfully given a clear delegation of subject-matter authority. The Court emphasized that criminal prosecutions require exacting proof of every element, including a specific, authorized subject of inquiry. The Government’s invitation to “infer” full Committee approval from past or public statements was found insufficient.

Real world impact

This decision prevents criminal punishment under § 192 when the investigating committee or subcommittee has not been clearly authorized and given a specific subject to pursue. It protects witnesses from being prosecuted for refusing to answer questions posed by a body lacking a clear chain of authority and defined scope. The Court did not decide broader constitutional questions about the Committee’s power; those issues remain unresolved.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Black concurred in the judgment but would have reversed on the ground that these inquiries unconstitutionally encroached on judicial power, as he explained in a prior dissent in Barenblatt.