On the day this suit was filed, the circuit court agreed to issue an ex parte order restraining the Association from conducting business in the state or taking steps to qualify it to do so. Read our student testimonials. In 1956, the Attorney General of Alabama, John Patterson, brought a suit to the State Circuit Court of Montgomery, Alabama, challenging the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) for violation of a state statute requiring foreign corporations to qualify before doing business in the state. Were not just a study aid for law students; were the study aid for law students. It is hardly a novel perception that compelled disclosure of affiliation with groups engaged in advocacy may constitute as effective a restraint on freedom of association as the forms of governmental action in the cases above were thought likely to produce upon the particular constitutional rights there involved. Because of this case, a government cannot force a group to identify its members unless there is a compelling state interest in disclosure. Learn how and when to remove this template message, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama ex rel. Meet our team. v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Linmark Assoc., Inc. v. Township of Willingboro, Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission, Consol. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is a non-profit. The NAACP tried to qualify itself under the statute, but refused to comply with the courts order to produce documents. Cf. Communist Party v. Subversive Activities Control Bd. The contempt order was affirmed by the Alabama Supreme Court, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari. [1] Harlan said the following. Mt. of Wisconsin System v. Southworth, Regan v. Taxation with Representation of Washington, National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley, Walker v. Texas Div., Sons of Confederate Veterans, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. Furthermore, the situation before us is significantly different from that in Bryant, because the organization there had made no effort to comply with any of the requirements of New York's statute but rather had refused to furnish the State with any information as to its local activities. Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton. After the circuit court issued a restraining order, the state issued a subpoena for various records, including the NAACP's membership lists. Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an A in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. For the final project in my AP Government and US History classes, the students were asked to songify an event. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee. The issues in the litigation commenced by Alabama by its bill in equity were whether the character of petitioner and its activities in Alabama had been such as to make petitioner subject to the registration statute, and whether the extent of petitioner's activities without qualifying suggested its permanent ouster from the State. Quimbee might not work properly for you until you. law school study materials, including 735 video lessons and 4,900+ Read more about Quimbee. We hold that the immunity from state scrutiny of membership lists which the Association claims on behalf of its members is here so related to the right of the members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in so doing as to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. The State Attorney General sued in State court to enjoin the NAACP from conducting any activities in the State, alleging that it caused irreparable injury to the State.