|
Calhoon v. Harvey, 379 U.S. 134 (1964)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Calhoon v. Harvey, 379 U.S. 134 (1964)
Calhoon v. Harvey No. 17 Argued October 20, 1964 Decided December 7, 1964 379 U.S. 134
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Under petitioner union’s bylaws, members could nominate only themselves to office, eligibility for which, under the national constitution, was limited by specified provisions. Charging that these provisions, which they did not meet, deprived them of "equal rights" to nominate candidates under Title I, § 101(a)(1), of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA), respondent union members sued under § 102 in the District Court to enjoin use of the union’s challenged electoral system. That court dismissed the complaint for want of jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the combined effect of the eligibility requirements under Title IV, § 401(e), and the restriction to self-nomination determined whether § 101(a)(1) had been violated.
Held:
1. A federal district court has no jurisdiction over a suit by union members under § 102 of the LMRDA charging that the union’s eligibility qualifications deprived them of the right to nominate candidates guaranteed by § 101(a)(1), that provision being directed solely against discrimination in the union’s electoral process itself. Pp. 138-139.
2. Eligibility requirements are governed by Title IV, § 401(e). The exclusive remedy, with exceptions not here relevant, for protecting rights thereunder is a post-election suit by the Secretary of Labor following complaint of a member who has exhausted his union remedies, as required by the Act, and an investigation by the Secretary showing probable cause of a violation. Pp. 139-141.
324 F.2d 46 reversed
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Calhoon v. Harvey, 379 U.S. 134 (1964) in 379 U.S. 134 379 U.S. 135. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=C8NJQRSW5FMYPBN.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Calhoon v. Harvey, 379 U.S. 134 (1964), in 379 U.S. 134, page 379 U.S. 135. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=C8NJQRSW5FMYPBN.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Calhoon v. Harvey, 379 U.S. 134 (1964). cited in 1964, 379 U.S. 134, pp.379 U.S. 135. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=C8NJQRSW5FMYPBN.
|