Sigler, Chairman, Board of Parole, Et Al. v. Berrigan Et Al.

Background

The Chairman of the Board of Parole for the Department of Justice sought an emergency court order concerning two men, Phillip and Daniel Berrigan, who proposed travel to North Vietnam. The Parole Board regulation (28 C.F.R. §2.28(c)) requires board approval for travel outside the continental United States. The State Department had determined the proposed travel was not in the national interest, and the Government asked the Court for a stay of any lower-court action that might allow the trip.

Reasoning

The key question was whether the Executive branch could halt or pause the planned travel in the absence of a specific statute banning such trips. The Court granted the Government’s application for a stay. Justice Douglas dissented, arguing there is no law barring the travel, that power to regulate travel belongs to Congress, and that travel is a peripheral First Amendment right fostering free speech and information.

Real world impact

The immediate effect is that the two men cannot go to North Vietnam while the legal dispute continues; the Government can use emergency court orders to pause travel pending further proceedings. The case highlights that paroled individuals seeking foreign travel may be subject to Parole Board approval and Executive views about national interest. Because this action is a stay and not a final decision on the merits, the restriction is temporary and could be changed in later court proceedings.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Douglas would have allowed the travel, stressing free-speech values, the importance of exchanges even with adversary regimes, and that no evidence showed an intent to flee.