Lamont v. Postmaster General

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1965 United States Supreme Court case

Lamont v. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301 (1965), is a landmark First Amendment Supreme Court case, in which the ruling of the Supreme Court struck down § 305(a) of the Postal Service and Federal Employees Salary Act of 1962, a federal statute requiring the Postmaster General to detain and deliver only upon the addressee's request unsealed foreign mailings of "communist political propaganda."[1]

Background

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lamont_v._Postmaster_General&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Background")
]

39 U.S.C. 4008 (1964) required the U.S. Postmaster General to detain and not deliver "communist political propaganda," unless a recipient affirmatively indicated their consent to receive such materials through the mail. Dr. Corliss Lamont had a copy of the _Peking Review _ detained and declined to respond to the government's inquiry as to whether he wished to receive the delivery. Lamont subsequently filed suit alleging that Section 4008 violated his 1st Amendment and 5th Amendment rights.

Opinion of the court

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lamont_v._Postmaster_General&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: Opinion of the court")
]

The Court held:

the Act, as construed and applied, is unconstitutional, since it imposes on the addressee an affirmative obligation which amounts to an unconstitutional limitation of his rights under the First Amendment.[1]

The Court was unanimous in the judgment (8–0, with Justice White recused). Justice Brennan wrote a concurring opinion (which Justice Goldberg joined) and Justice Harlan also wrote a concurring opinion.

See also

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lamont_v._Postmaster_General&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: See also")
]

• Chilling effect

References

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lamont_v._Postmaster_General&action=edit&section=4 "Edit section: References")
]

1. 1 2 Lamont v. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301 (1965).

Further reading

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lamont_v._Postmaster_General&action=edit&section=5 "Edit section: Further reading")
]

• Sigler, Jay A. (1965). "Freedom of the Mails: A Developing Right". Georgetown Law Journal. 54: 30.

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lamont_v._Postmaster_General&action=edit&section=6 "Edit section: External links")
]

• Works related to Lamont v. Postmaster General at Wikisource
• Text of Lamont v. Postmaster General, 381 U.S. 301 (1965) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Internet Archive (docket files) Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)

U.S. Supreme Court Freedom of Speech Clause case law

**First Amendment to the United States Constitution **

Unprotected speech

Strict scrutiny

• _Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project _ (2010)
• _Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar _ (2015)

Overbreadth and
Vagueness doctrines

• _Terminiello v. City of Chicago _ (1949)
• _Smith v. Goguen _ (1974)
• _Board of Airport Commissioners v. Jews for Jesus _ (1987)
• _Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky _ (2018)

Symbolic speech

versus conduct

• _Stromberg v. California _ (1931)
• _United States v. O'Brien _ (1968)
• _Cohen v. California _ (1971)
• _Spence v. Washington _ (1974)
• _Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence _ (1984)
• _Dallas v. Stanglin _ (1989)
• _Texas v. Johnson _ (1989)
• _United States v. Eichman _ (1990)
• _Barnes v. Glen Theatre _ (1991)
• _City of Erie v. Pap's A. M. _ (2000)
• _Virginia v. Black _ (2003)

Content-based
restrictions

• _Lamont v. Postmaster General _ (1965)
• _Metromedia, Inc. v. San Diego _ (1981)
• _Boos v. Barry _ (1988)
• _Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Crime Victims Board _ (1991)
• _R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul _ (1992)
• _Reed v. Town of Gilbert _ (2015)
• _Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants _ (2020)
• _City of Austin v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC _ (2022)

Content-neutral
restrictions

• _Schneider v. New Jersey _ (1939)
• _United States v. Albertini _ (1985)
• _Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc. _ (1986)
• _Arcara v. Cloud Books, Inc. _ (1986)
• _City of Ladue v. Gilleo _ (1994)
• _Packingham v. North Carolina _ (2017)
• _TikTok v. Garland _ (2025)

Compelled speech

• _Minersville School District v. Gobitis _ (1940)
• _West Virginia State Board of Ed. v. Barnette _ (1943)
• _Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo _ (1974)
• _Wooley v. Maynard _ (1977)
• _Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins _ (1980)
• _Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Comm'n of California _ (1986)
• _Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston _ (1995)
• _[Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights, Inc.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumsfeld_v._Forum_f

…