State and Federal Authority in Screws v. United States Essay -- Suprem

deposit and federal Authority in Screws v. get together States right(prenominal) the courthouse in Newton, Georgia, in the early hours of January 30, 1943, Robert docking facilityby mansion house was beaten unconscious by M. Claude Screws, Frank Edward Jones, and Jim Bob Kelley1 while in their custody for the alleged stealth of a fatigue2 Screws, Jones and Kelley were, respectively, Baker county sheriff, night policeman, and a civilian deputized specifically for the arrest.3 Without ever regain consciousness, Hall died as a result of a fractured skull shortly by and by his arrival at an Alb each hospital that morning.4 The NAACP and FBI investigated Halls termination in the following months and federal charges were brought against Screws, Jones, and Kelley for violation of element 20 of the Federal Criminal Code, which stipulates that no soulfulness may down the stairs color of any justice willfully deprive a person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured o r protected by the Constitution and laws of the get together States.5 After organism found guilty in the lower courts, the defendants brought their shell to the Supreme beg on appeal, alleging that they had violated a separate instead than federal law and, consequently, could not be held liable under naval division 20. The Supreme philanders central concern in Screws et al. v. join States was to interpret the intention and breadth of Section 20 in rove to judge its entireity in doing so, the Court struggled to reach a consensus regarding the definition of state action and the indeterminate nature of the rights protected by the statute. Such consensus be difficult, indeed, as the bailiwick was narrowly decided and divided the Court along deep constitutional lines while a majority of the Court advocated about-face of the lower co... ...41 Screws et al. v. get together States, 325 U.S. 91, 151-152 (1945).42 Ibid., 143.43 Ibid., 111.44 Ibid., 145-146.45 Ibid., 149.46 entry by Mr. umpire Jackson, February 2, 1945, Jackson Papers, 5.47 probe Justice murphys dissent, wherein he insists that it is idle to speculate on other situations that superpower involve 20 which are not straight before us. Screws et al. v. United States, 325 U.S. 91, 136 (1945).48 Felix Frankfurter to Chief Justice rock-and-roll, November 30, 1944, Harlan Fiske Stone Papers.49 Justice Frank stump spuds Notes on Screws et al. v. United States, Frank white potato vine Papers.50 Screws et al. v. United States, 325 U.S. 91, 139 (1945).51 Memorandum by Mr. Justice Jackson, February 2, 1945, Jackson Papers, 6.52 Harlan Fiske Stone to William O. Douglas, November 25, 1944, Harlan Fiske Stone Papers. State and Federal Authority in Screws v. United States Essay -- SupremState and Federal Authority in Screws v. United States Outside the courthouse in Newton, Georgia, in the early hours of January 30, 1943, Robert Bobby Hall was beaten unconscious by M. Claude Scr ews, Frank Edward Jones, and Jim Bob Kelley1 while in their custody for the alleged theft of a tire2 Screws, Jones and Kelley were, respectively, Baker county sheriff, night policeman, and a civilian deputized specifically for the arrest.3 Without ever recovering consciousness, Hall died as a result of a fractured skull shortly after his arrival at an Albany hospital that morning.4 The NAACP and FBI investigated Halls death in the following months and federal charges were brought against Screws, Jones, and Kelley for violation of Section 20 of the Federal Criminal Code, which stipulates that no person may under color of any law willfully deprive a person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States.5 After being found guilty in the lower courts, the defendants brought their case to the Supreme Court on appeal, alleging that they had violated a state rather than federal law and, consequently, could not be held lia ble under Section 20. The Supreme Courts central concern in Screws et al. v. United States was to interpret the intent and breadth of Section 20 in order to judge its constitutionality in doing so, the Court struggled to reach a consensus regarding the definition of state action and the indefinite nature of the rights protected by the statute. Such consensus proved difficult, indeed, as the case was narrowly decided and divided the Court along deep constitutional lines while a majority of the Court advocated reversal of the lower co... ...41 Screws et al. v. United States, 325 U.S. 91, 151-152 (1945).42 Ibid., 143.43 Ibid., 111.44 Ibid., 145-146.45 Ibid., 149.46 Memorandum by Mr. Justice Jackson, February 2, 1945, Jackson Papers, 5.47 See Justice Murphys dissent, wherein he insists that it is idle to speculate on other situations that might involve 20 which are not now before us. Screws et al. v. United States, 325 U.S. 91, 136 (1945).48 Felix Frankfurter to Chief Justice Stone, November 30, 1944, Harlan Fiske Stone Papers.49 Justice Frank Murphys Notes on Screws et al. v. United States, Frank Murphy Papers.50 Screws et al. v. United States, 325 U.S. 91, 139 (1945).51 Memorandum by Mr. Justice Jackson, February 2, 1945, Jackson Papers, 6.52 Harlan Fiske Stone to William O. Douglas, November 25, 1944, Harlan Fiske Stone Papers.