Jenkins v. McKeithen
- Decided
- June 9, 1969
- Docket
- 548
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,928 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that commission which accusatory undertook function of publicly labeling persons as criminal violators must grant such persons due process protection — State v. Druktenis (2004)
- holding that in 12(b)(5) motions, material allegations are taken as true and liberally construed in favor of non-moving party — United States v. Ferro Union, Inc. and Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. (2000)
- holding that pro se complaints should continue to be liberally 22 construed after Iqbal — Casteel v. Kinnison (2020)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Me. Justice Marshall announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion in which Mr. Chief Justice Warren and Mr. Justice Brennan join.
This case involves the constitutionality of a 1967 Louisiana statute, known as Act No. 2, which creates [*414] a body called the Labor-Management Commission of Inquiry. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§23:880.1-23:880.18 (Supp. 1969). The stated purpose of this Commission is “the investigation and findings of facts relating to violations or possible violations of criminal laws of the state of Louisiana or of the United States arising out of or in connection with matters in the field of labor-management relations Act No. 2, Preamble, [1967 Extra. Sess.] La. Acts 3. Appellant, a member of a labor union, filed this suit in the District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana challenging the constitutionality of Act No. 2 and of certain actions taken by state officials in the administration of the Act and otherwise. He sought both declaratory and injunctive relief. A three-judge court was convened and that court ultimately granted appellees' motion to dismiss the complaint. Jenkins v. McKeithen, 286 F. Supp. 537 (D. C. E. D. La. 1968). We noted probable jurisdiction of an appeal brought under 28 U. S. C. § 1253.[1] We reverse.
Since the case was decided on a motion to dismiss, a rather detailed examination of the structure of the Act and of the allegations of the complaint is necessary.
Statutes cited
Cite this
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411 (1969)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.