Deutch v. United States, 13694.

Decision Date18 June 1960
Docket NumberNo. 13694.,13694.
Citation280 F.2d 691
PartiesBernhard DEUTCH, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit

Mr. Henry W. Sawyer, III, of the bar of the Supreme Court of the United States, Philadelphia, Pa., pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Mr. George Herbert Goodrich, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Miss Doris Spangenburg, Asst. U. S. Atty., for appellee.

Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., Carl W. Belcher, Lewis Carroll, William Hitz, and Harold D. Rhynedance, Jr., Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief for appellee.

Mr. John D. Lane, Asst. U. S. Atty., also entered an appearance for appellee.

Before WASHINGTON, BASTIAN and BURGER, Circuit Judges.

BASTIAN, Circuit Judge.

This is a contempt of Congress case arising from a hearing held by a subcommittee of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Appellant Deutch was indicted for contempt for his refusal to answer certain questions.1 He was tried in the District Court by a judge sitting alone (jury having been waived), convicted and sentenced on four of the five counts of the indictment.2 On appeal, appellant urges that the subject matter under inquiry and the pertinency to that subject matter of the questions set forth in the indictment were not proved by the Government beyond a reasonable doubt to have appeared with indisputable clarity at the time of the subcommittee hearing. Appellant also attacks the legislative purpose of the investigation and the power of the committee to engage in exposure. He also objects to the admission of certain documentary evidence at the trial. Lastly, he relies on his rights under the First Amendment.

In July 1953, the committee began hearings in Albany, New York, in connection with a general investigation of communist activities in that area.3 At these hearings, there was testimony to the effect that during the period 1947-1953 a communist cell was active on the campus of Cornell University and that students enrolled at the university were accepting positions with communist-controlled labor unions. The committee also received information that appellant had participated in this communist activity and that he might know the name of a professor (theretofore unknown) of the university who had obtained funds for the communist cell. The committee determined to call appellant to inquire into these activities relating to both communism in education and communist infiltration into labor unions.

Thereafter, the committee interrupted the Albany hearings and announced that further hearings were postponed until a later date. The hearings were resumed in Albany in April 1954. At the commencement of the reopened hearing (April 7, 1954), the Chairman of the subcommittee made the following statements:

"This committee is charged by the Congress of the United States with the responsibility of investigating the extent, character, and objects of un-American propaganda activities in the United States, the diffusion within the United States of subversive and un-American propaganda that is instigated from foreign countries, or of a domestic origin, and attacks the principles of the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitution and all other questions in relation thereto that will aid Congress in any necessary remedial legislation.
"The Committee on Un-American Activities will resume this morning the investigation of Communist Party activities within the capital area. This is a continuation of the open hearings which were conducted in Albany between July 13 and 16, 1953. The investigation has been extended into adjacent areas, from which witnesses are also expected to be heard.
"A public announcement was made in January that hearings would be resumed here at a much earlier date, but due to my desire not to interfere with sessions of the Federal court, and for reasons beyond the committee\'s control, it became necessary to postpone them until this time.
* * * * * *
"Other testimony taken at the 1953 Albany hearings related to the efforts of the Communist Party to infiltrate industry and other segments of society in the capital area. Testimony now to be heard is expected to supplement that formerly given on this subject and as indicated will extend into adjacent areas.
"I want to emphasize what I have stated hitherto, namely that the committee is not concerned with the political beliefs or opinions of any witness. It is concerned only with facts showing the extent, character, and objects of Communist Party activities within the areas from which the witnesses are subpenaed.
"I desire also to make it clear that this committee is not interested in any dispute between management and labor or with internal disputes within the field of labor. However, the committee considers that it has a legislative mandate to investigate the extent, character, and objects of Communist Party activities where-ever evidence of its existence is found, and this it proposes to do.
"This committee is not investigating labor unions but it is investigating communism within the field of labor where it has substantial evidence that it exists. Such an investigation is particularly pertinent at this time when the Committee on Un-American Activities is engaged in the study of H.R. 7487 which has been referred by the Speaker of the House to this committee.
"In keeping with the long-standing policy of this committee, any individuals or organizations, whose names are mentioned during the course of the hearing in such a manner as to adversely affect them, shall have an opportunity to appear before the committee for the purpose of making a denial or offering an explanation of such adverse information."

One of the witnesses called on April 7, 1954, testified as to communist activities at Cornell University from 1947 to 1951. On April 8, 1954, another witness4 testified that he the witness became a member of the communist group at Cornell and was assigned to the Labor Youth League, "which is a sort of training for future communist members." This witness gave testimony about communist activities at the university and stated that Deutch had acted as a contact man, in 1952 and 1953, between the Communist Party and a member of the faculty whose name was unknown to the witness. He also testified that appellant had received a contribution for the Communist Party from an unknown source. For this reason, appellant was subpoenaed to appear before the committee in Albany on April 9, 1954.

As his counsel protested the shortness of time, appellant was granted a continuance to April 12, when, accompanied by his counsel, he appeared before the committee in executive session in Washington, D. C. He was at that time 25 years of age, a graduate student attending the University of Pennsylvania, having previously studied at Cornell. He was represented at the hearing by the same counsel who represented him in the District Court and in this court, and who had secured the continuance for him. Appellant asked for and was granted frequent opportunities to confer with his counsel. Never once did he indicate unawareness of the purpose of the hearing, or doubt as to the pertinency of the questions. At the outset of the hearing, he was informed and questioned by the committee counsel, Mr. Tavener, as follows:

"Mr. Deutch, during hearings at Albany last week, the committee heard testimony regarding the existence of a Communist Party group or cell operating among undergraduates at Cornell University, among certain graduates at Cornell and in the city of Ithaca.
"In connection with that testimony, the committee was informed that you were a member of one or more of those groups. If so, I would like to ask you certain matters relating to your activity there.
"Were you a member of a group of the Communist Party at Cornell?"

After conferring with his counsel, Mr. Sawyer, Deutch responded under protest that he had been a member of the Communist Party. His objection and answer to the question were as follows:

"I wish to register a challenge as to the jurisdiction of this committee under Public Law 601, which is the committee\'s enabling legislation. This question, or any similar questions involving my associations, past or future, I am answering, but only under protest as to its constitutionality. But, under your jurisdiction as stated, I answer yes, I was a member of the Communist Party."

Committee counsel continued:

"The committee was advised that a witness by the name of Ross Richardson has stated that you acted as liaison between a Communist Party group on the campus and a member of the faculty at Cornell, and that you knew the name of the member of that faculty, who was a member of the Communist Party.
"Will you tell us who that member of the faculty was?"

After again conferring with his counsel, appellant stated:

"Sir, I am perfectly willing to tell about my own activities, but do you feel I should trade my moral scruples by informing on someone else?"

He was advised that moral scruples on his part "do not constitute a legal reason for declining to answer the question," and he was directed to answer. He declined, stating that he would not answer questions about other people, but only about himself.

Representative Doyle, a member of the subcommittee, then made the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Deutch v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 12, 1961
    ...a jury and was convicted upon four of the five counts of the indictment. The judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 143, 280 F.2d 691, and we brought the case here because of doubt as to the validity of the conviction in the light of our pre- vious decisions. 2 364 ......
  • Gojack v. United States, 13464.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • June 18, 1960
    ...688 — affirmed. No. 13656 — Watson v. United States, 108 U.S.App.D.C. ___, 280 F.2d 689 — reversed. No. 13694 — Deutch v. United States, 108 U.S.App.D.C. ___, 280 F.2d 691 — No. 13734 — Knowles v. United States, 108 U.S.App.D.C. ___, 280 F.2d 696 — reversed. No. 13737 — Shelton v. United St......
  • Watson v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • June 18, 1960
  • Whitman v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • July 7, 1960
    ...the claims covered by the first and fifth contentions must be rejected. And in view of the decision in Deutch v. United States, 1960, ___ U.S.App.D.C. ___, 280 F.2d 691, the third and fourth contentions cannot be a basis for As to appellant's second claim, we note that at least half of the ......
1 books & journal articles
  • Faces in the courtroom.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 146 No. 4, April 1998
    • April 1, 1998
    ...for Petitioner at 8 (No. 233). (18) Deutch, 367 U.S. at 460 n.4. (19) See United States v. Deutch, 147 F. Supp. 89 (D.D.C. 1956), aff'd, 280 F.2d 691 (D.C. Cir. 1960), rev'd, 367 U.S. 456 (1961). Surprisingly, in view of this being a bench trial, Judge Holtzoff never mentioned Deutch's name......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT