Summary

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Braden v. United States — Opinion of the Court

At the trial the district judge determined as a matter of law that the questions were pertinent to a matter under inquiry by the subcommittee, [5] leaving to the jury the question whether the pertinence of the questions had been brought home to the petitioner. It is to be noted that counsel made no timely objection to this procedure and, indeed, affirmatively acquiesced in it. [6] But we need not base rejection of the petitioner's contention here on that ground, for, in any event, it was proper for the court to determine the question as a matter of law.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart Braden v. United States — Opinion of the Court

Education, too, is legitimate and protected activity. Communist infiltration and propaganda in a given area of the country, which were the subjects of the subcommittee investigation here, are surely as much within its pervasive authority as Communist activity in educational institutions. The subcommittee had reason to believe that the petitioner was a member of the Communist Party, and that he had been actively engaged in propaganda efforts. It was making a legislative inquiry into Communist Party propaganda activities in the southern States.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature