List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 307 explained

Location:Washington, D.C.
Type:Presidential nomination with Senate confirmation
Authority:Constitution of the United States, Art. III, §1
Terms:life tenure, subject to impeachment and removal
Positions:9 (by statute)

This is a list of cases reported in volume 307 of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1939.

Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of volume 307 U.S.

See also: List of justices of the Supreme Court of the United States.

See also: List of United States Supreme Court justices by time in office.

See also: List of justices of the Supreme Court of the United States by court composition.

The Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).[1] Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice).

When the cases in volume 307 were decided the Court comprised the following members:

PortraitJusticeOfficeHome StateSucceededDate confirmed by the Senate
(Vote)
Tenure on Supreme Court
Charles Evans HughesChief JusticeNew YorkWilliam Howard Taft
(52–26)


June 30, 1941
(Retired)
James Clark McReynoldsAssociate JusticeTennesseeHorace Harmon Lurton
(44–6)


January 31, 1941
(Retired)
Pierce ButlerAssociate JusticeMinnesotaWilliam R. Day
(61–8)


November 16, 1939
(Died)
Harlan F. StoneAssociate JusticeNew YorkJoseph McKenna
(71–6)


July 2, 1941
(Continued as chief justice)
Owen RobertsAssociate JusticePennsylvaniaEdward Terry Sanford
(Acclamation)


July 31, 1945
(Resigned)
Hugo BlackAssociate JusticeAlabamaWillis Van Devanter
(63–16)


September 17, 1971
(Retired)
Stanley Forman ReedAssociate JusticeKentuckyGeorge Sutherland
(Acclamation)


February 25, 1957
(Retired)
Felix FrankfurterAssociate JusticeMassachusettsBenjamin Nathan Cardozo
(Acclamation)


August 28, 1962
(Retired)
William O. DouglasAssociate JusticeConnecticutLouis Brandeis
(62–4)


November 12, 1975
(Retired)

Notable Cases in 307 U.S.

United States v. Miller

United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), is a significant Supreme Court decision involving a Second Amendment to the United States Constitution challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). The case is often cited in the ongoing American gun politics debate, as both sides claim that it supports their position.

Lane v. Wilson

In Lane v. Wilson, 307 U.S. 268 (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that a 12-day, one-time voter registration window was discriminatory for black citizens and repugnant to the Fifteenth Amendment.

Perkins, Secretary of Labor v. Elg

Perkins, Secretary of Labor v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939), is a decision by the Supreme Court that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents is a natural-born citizen, and that the child's U.S. citizenship is not lost if the child is taken to and raised in the country of the parents' origin, provided that upon attaining the age of majority, the young person elects to retain U.S. citizenship "and to return to the United States to assume its duties."

Coleman v. Miller, Secretary of the Senate of Kansas

Coleman v. Miller, Secretary of the Senate of Kansas, 307 U.S. 433 (1939), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court, which clarified that if the Congress of the United States—when proposing for ratification an amendment to the United States Constitution, pursuant to Article V —chooses not to set a deadline by which the state legislatures of three-fourths of the states or, if prescribed by Congress state ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states, must act upon the proposed amendment, then the proposed amendment remains pending business before the state legislatures (or ratifying conventions). The case centered on the Child Labor Amendment, which was proposed for ratification by Congress in 1924. In light of the precedent established by this ruling, three proposed constitutional amendments, in addition to the Child Labor Amendment, are considered still to be pending before the state legislatures, since Congress did not specify a ratification deadline: the Congressional Apportionment Amendment since 1789; the Titles of Nobility Amendment since 1810; and the Corwin Amendment since 1861.

Federal court system

See also: United States district court.

See also: United States court of appeals.

See also: United States federal courts. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.

The Judiciary Act of 1891 created the United States Courts of Appeals and reassigned the jurisdiction of most routine appeals from the district and circuit courts to these appellate courts. The Act created nine new courts that were originally known as the "United States Circuit Courts of Appeals." The new courts had jurisdiction over most appeals of lower court decisions. The Supreme Court could review either legal issues that a court of appeals certified or decisions of court of appeals by writ of certiorari. On January 1, 1912, the effective date of the Judicial Code of 1911, the old Circuit Courts were abolished, with their remaining trial court jurisdiction transferred to the U.S. District Courts.

List of cases in volume 307 U.S.

See also: Hughes Court.

Case nameCitationOpinion of the CourtVoteConcurring opinion or statementDissenting opinion or statementProcedural jurisdictionResult
Chippewa Indians of Minnesota v. United States307 U.S. 1 (1939)Roberts8-0[a]nonenoneappeal from the United States Court of Claims (Ct. Cl.)affirmed
Electric Storage Battery Company v. Shimadzu307 U.S. 5 (1939)Roberts8-0[a]nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (3d Cir.)reversed
Kessler v. Strecker307 U.S. 22 (1939)Roberts6-2[a]noneMcReynolds (opinion; joined by Butler)certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (5th Cir.)affirmed
Mulford v. Smith307 U.S. 38 (1939)Roberts6-2[a]noneButler (opinion; with which McReynolds concurred)appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia (M.D. Ga.)affirmed
United States Trust Company v. Helvering, Commissioner of Internal Revenue307 U.S. 57 (1939)Black8-0[a]nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (2d Cir.)affirmed
McCrone v. United States307 U.S. 61 (1939)Black8-0[a]nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (9th Cir.)affirmed
Gibbs, Attorney General of Florida v. Buck307 U.S. 66 (1939)Reed6-1[a][b]noneBlack (opinion)appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida (N.D. Fla.)affirmed
Buck v. Gallagher, State Treasurer of Washington307 U.S. 95 (1939)Reed6-1[a][b]noneBlack (without opinion)appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington (W.D. Wash.)reversed
Driscoll and Others, Constituting the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission v. Edison Light and Power Company307 U.S. 104 (1939)Reed8-0[a]Frankfurter (opinion; with which Black concurred)noneappeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (E.D. Pa.)reversed
Rochester Telephone Corporation v. United States307 U.S. 125 (1939)Frankfurter8-0[a]McReynolds (without opinion); Butler (opinion; with which McReynolds concurred)noneappeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (W.D.N.Y.)affirmed
United States v. Maher, doing business as Interstate Busses307 U.S. 148 (1939)Frankfurter8-0[a]nonenoneappeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon (D. Or.)reversed
Federal Power Commission v. Pacific Power and Light Company307 U.S. 156 (1939)Frankfurter8-0[a]nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (9th Cir.)affirmed
Sprague v. Ticonic National Bank307 U.S. 161 (1939)Frankfurter8-0[a]McReynolds and Butler (without opinions)nonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (1st Cir.)reversed
William Jameson and Company v. Morgenthau, Secretary of the Treasury307 U.S. 171 (1939)per curiam9-0nonenoneappeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.D.C.)vacated
United States v. Miller307 U.S. 174 (1939)McReynolds8-0[a]nonenoneappeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas (W.D. Ark.)reversed
United States v. Morgan307 U.S. 183 (1939)Stone5-3[c]noneButler (opinion; joined by McReynolds and Roberts)appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri (W.D. Mo.)reversed
United States v. Marxen307 U.S. 200 (1939)Reed7-0[a][d]nonenonecertified question from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (9th Cir.)certified question answered
Rorick v. Everglades Drainage District307 U.S. 208 (1939)Frankfurter8-0[a]nonenoneappeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida (N.D. Fla.)vacated
United States v. Powers307 U.S. 214 (1939)Douglas9-0nonenoneappeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (S.D. Tex.)reversed
United States v. One 1936 Model Ford V-8 Deluxe Coach307 U.S. 219 (1939)McReynolds4-3[e][f]noneDouglas (opinion; joined by Black and Frankfurter)certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (4th Cir.)affirmed
Electric Fittings Corporation v. Thomas and Betts Company307 U.S. 241 (1939)Roberts9-0nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (2d Cir.)reversed
Maytag Company v. Hurley Machine Company307 U.S. 243 (1939)Roberts9-0nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (2d Cir.)affirmed (two cases); reversed (one case)
Guaranty Trust Company v. Henwood307 U.S. 247 (1939)Black5-4noneStone (opinion; with which Hughes, MccReynolds, and Butler concurred)certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (8th Cir.)affirmed
Bethlehem Steel Company v. Zurich General Accident and Liability Insurance Company307 U.S. 265 (1939)Black5-4noneHughes, McReynolds, Butler, and Stone (joint short statement)certiorari to the New York Supreme Court (N.Y. Sup. Ct.)reversed
Lane v. Wilson307 U.S. 268 (1939)Frankfurter6-2[a]noneMcReynolds and Butler (without opinions)certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (10th Cir.)reversed
O'Malley, Collector of Internal Revenue v. Woodrough307 U.S. 277 (1939)Frankfurter7-1[g]noneButler (opinion)appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska (D. Neb.)reversed
Rorick v. Devon Syndicate, Ltd.307 U.S. 299 (1939)Douglas9-0nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (6th Cir.)reversed
Newark Fire Insurance Company v. State Board of Tax Appeals of New Jersey307 U.S. 313 (1939)plurality opinions8-1Reed (opinion; with which Hughes, Butler, and Roberts concurred); Frankfurter (opinion; with which Stone, Black, and Douglas concurred)McReynolds (without opinion)appeal from the New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals (N.J.)affirmed
Perkins, Secretary of Labor v. Elg307 U.S. 325 (1939)Hughes8-0[a]nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Cir.)affirmed as modified
Toledo Pressed Steel Company v. Standard Parts, Inc.307 U.S. 350 (1939)Butler8-0[a]nonenonecertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (6th Cir.)affirmed (two cases); reversed (one case)
Curry, State Tax Commissioner of Alabama v. McCanless, Commissioner of Finance and Taxation of Tennessee307 U.S. 357 (1939)Stone5-4Reed (short statement)Butler (opinion; joined by Hughes, McReynolds, and Roberts)appeal from the Tennessee Supreme Court (Tenn.)reversed
Graves and Others, Commissioners Constituting the State Tax Commission of New York v. Elliott307 U.S. 383 (1939)Stone5-4noneHughes (opinion; with which McReynolds, Butler, and Roberts concurred)certiorari to the New York Surrogate's Court of New York County (N.Y. Cnty. Sur. Ct.)reversed
Southern Pacific Company v. United States307 U.S. 393 (1939)Reed5-3[a]noneButler (opinion; joined by McReynolds and Roberts)certiorari to the United States Court of Claims (Ct. Cl.)affirmed
Coleman v. Miller, Secretary of the Senate of Kansas307 U.S. 433 (1939)Hughes7-2Black (opinion; joined by Roberts, Frankfurter, and Douglas); Frankfurter (opinion)Butler (opinion; joined by McReynolds)certiorari to the Kansas Supreme Court (Kan.)affirmed
Chandler, Governor of Kentucky v. Wise307 U.S. 474 (1939)Hughes7-2Black and Douglas (joint short statement)McReynolds and Butler (joint short statement)certiorari to the Kentucky Court of Appeals (Ky.)dismissed
Baldwin v. Scott County Milling Company307 U.S. 478 (1939)Butler9-0nonenonecertiorari to the Missouri Supreme Court (Mo.)reversed
American Toll Bridge Company v. Railroad Commission of California307 U.S. 486 (1939)Butler9-0Black, Frankfurter, and Douglas (without opinions)noneappeal from the California Supreme Court (Cal.)affirmed
Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization307 U.S. 496 (1939)plurality opinions5-2[a][b]Roberts (opinion; with which Black concurred); Stone (opinion; with which Reed concurred); Hughes (short statement)McReynolds (short statement); Butler (short statement)certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (3d Cir.)affirmed as modified
United States v. Rock Royal Co-operative, Inc.307 U.S. 533 (1939)Reed5-4Black and Douglas (joint short statement)McReynolds and Butler (joint opinion); Roberts (opinion; joined by Hughes, McReynolds, and Butler)appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (N.D.N.Y.)mixed outcomes
H.P. Hood and Sons, Inc. v. United States307 U.S. 588 (1939)Reed6-3noneRoberts (opinion; joined by McReynolds and Butler)certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (1st Cir.)affirmed

[a] Douglas took no part in the case

[b] Frankfurter took no part in the case

[c] Reed took no part in the case

[d] Hughes took no part in the case

[e] Butler took no part in the case

[f] Stone took no part in the case

[g] McReynolds took no part in the case

External links

Notes and References

  1. Web site: Supreme Court Research Guide . 7 April 2021 . Georgetown Law Library.