Clara Cheeks v. Mark Jakob

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that § 1001 agency jurisdiction existed where National Labor Relations Board was granted “explicit statutory authority” to receive the affidavits that contained false statements relating to union member’s affiliations
• stating that “[a] citizen may decline to answer the question, or answer it honestly, but he cannot with impunity knowingly and willfully answer with a falsehood”
• holding citizen does not have privilege to falsely answer a question that the government should not have asked
• rejecting vagueness challenge to underlying statutory provision in the context of a false statement prosecution
• rejecting the argument that “a citizen has a privilege to answer fraudulently a question that the Government should not have asked”
• rejecting the argument that “a citizen has a privilege to answer fraudulently a question that the Government should not have asked”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).