Reed v. County Com Rs of Delaware County, Pa
| Decision Date | 28 May 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 744,744 |
| Citation | 72 L.Ed. 924,277 U.S. 376,48 S.Ct. 531 |
| Parties | REED et al. v. COUNTY COM'RS OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PA., et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Levi Cooke and Jerry C. South, both of Washington, D. C., for petitioners.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 376-383 intentionally omitted] Mr. Albert J. Williams, of Washington, D. C., for respondents.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 383-385 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice BUTLER delivered the opinion of the Court.
The petitioners brought this suit in the United States court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The court held it was without jurisdiction and dismissed the case. 21 F.(2d) 144. The Circuit of Appeals adopted its opinion, and affirmed the decree. 21 F.(2d) 1018.
Petitioners maintain that the District Court had jurisdiction under the first paragraph of section 24 of the Judicial Code, U. S. C. tit. 28, § 41 (28 USCA § 41(1), which provides that the District Courts shall have original jurisdiction 'of all suits of a civil nature, at common law or in equity, brought by the United States, or by any officer thereof authorized by law to sue. * * *'
Petitioners, other than South, are United States Senators, and constitute a special committee created by Senate Resolution 195, passed May 19, 1926, to make investigation of means used to influence the nomination of candidates for the Senate. The Resolution empowered the committee 'to require by subpoena or otherwise the at- tendance of witnesses, the production of books, papers, and documents, and to do such other acts as may be necessary in the matter of said investigation.'
At a general election held in Pennsylvania November 2, 1926, William S. Vare and William B. Wilson were opposing candidates for the United States Senate. Vare was given the certificate of election, and Wilson initiated a contest. Thereafter January 11, 1927, the Senate passed Resolution 324. It recites that Wilson charges fraudulent and unlawful practices in connection with Vare's nomination and the election, and declares that, unless preserved for the use of the Senate, evidence relating to the election will be lost or destroyed. The Resolution empowers the special committee 'to take * * * and preserve all ballot boxes, * * * ballots, return sheets, * * * and other records, books and documents used in said senatorial election. * * *' It confers on the committee 'all powers of procedure with respect to the subject-matter of this resolution that said committee possesses under Resolution numbered 195 * * * with respect to the subject-matter of that resolution'; and it requires the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate to attend and execute the directions of the committee.
The Chairman of the Committee on Audit and Control of Contingent Expenditures having refused to approve the special committee's vouchers for expenses after the expiration of that Congress, the Sergeant at Arms refused to execute its orders. Thereupon the special committee directed the petitioner South, as its representative, to take possession of the boxes, ballots, and other things referred to in Resolution 324.
Respondents are the commissioners, the prothonotary, and a justice of the peace of Delaware county, Pa. They are authorized custodians of boxes, ballots, and other things used in connection with the election. These were demanded by South in behalf of the commit- tee. Respondents declined to give them up, and this suit was brought to obtain possession of them.
Petitioners do not claim that any act of Congress authorizes the committee or its members, collectively or separately, to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Walker v. Cheney
...committee subpoena or adoption of a House resolution of inquiry," Pl.'s Cons.Reply at 24. Further, citing Reed v. County Com'rs, 277 U.S. 376, 388, 48 S.Ct. 531, 72 L.Ed. 924 (1928), plaintiff asserts that it was entirely proper for Congress to delegate to him the power to pursue this civil......
-
Cawthorn v. Amalfi
...of its members" exercises "the full, original, and unqualified power by the Constitution."); Reed v. Cnty. Comm'rs , 277 U.S. 376, 388, 48 S.Ct. 531, 72 L.Ed. 924 (1928) (noting that the Senate "is the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its members" and is "fully empower......
-
Watkins v. United States
...41, 73 S.Ct. 543, 97 L.Ed. 770; Sinclair v. United States, 1929, 279 U.S. 263, 49 S.Ct. 268, 73 L.Ed. 692; Reed v. County Commissioners, 1928, 277 U.S. 376, 48 S.Ct. 531, 72 L.Ed. 924; McGrain v. Daugherty, 1927, 273 U.S. 135, 47 S.Ct. 319, 71 L.Ed. 580; Landis, Constitutional Limitations o......
-
Senate Select Com. on Pres. Campaign Activities v. Nixon
...to sue as the United States under § 1345 may require a specific statutory enactment. The Court in Reed v. County Commissioners, 277 U.S. 376, 48 S.Ct. 531, 72 L.Ed. 924 (1928), did not reach the question of whether a Senate committee could act as the United States under 28 U.S.C. § 41 (pred......
-
LIQUIDATING THE INDEPENDENT STATE LEGISLATURE THEORY.
...https://perma.cc/5JB2-4KFP; Levitt, supra note 21 at 1063 n.39. (215.) U.S. Const. art. I, [section] 4. (216.) See Reed v. County Comm'rs, 277 U.S. 376, 388 (1928) (noting that under Article I, Section 5, each house of Congress "is fully empowered, and may determine such matters without the......
-
Congressional investigations: politics and process.
...decision holding that a Senate committee could not bring suit without authorization from the parent body. See Reed v. County Comm'rs, 277 U.S. 376, 389 (117.) [section] 1365(b); see also In re Application of the U.S. Permanent Subcomm. on Investigations, 655 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (D.C. Cir. 19......
-
WHO COUNTS?: THE TWELFTH AMENDMENT, THE VICE PRESIDENT, AND THE ELECTORAL COUNT.
...the House Work, 83 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1213, 1243-44 (2008). (227.) Barry v. United States, 279 U.S. 597, 613 (1929); Reed v. Cnty. Comm'rs, 277 U.S. 376, 388 (1928); see also Roudebush v. Hartke, 405 U.S. 15, 19 (228.) Harrison, supra note 26, at 702. (229.) The Federalist No. 39, at 214 (James......
-
Lawsuits and Legislative Leadership
...to make a recess appointment of Lord’s successor during any recess of the Senate in which the vacancy existed.”). [20] Id. at 12. [21] 277 U.S. 376 (1928). [22] Id. at 389. [23] 551 F.2d 384, 391 (D.C. Cir. 1976). [24] 521 U.S. 811 (1997). [25] Id. at 829. [26] See Crawford v. U.S. Dep’t of......