Plaintiff was reinstated in the classified civil service of the federal government on the condition that removal might be ordered if, "on all the evidence, reasonable grounds exist for belief that the [plaintiff] is disloyal to the Government of the United States." Such evidence having allegedly been uncovered, dismissal followed, with a ban against federal employment for three years. The specific grounds for suspicion were never revealed to plaintiff, and no opportunity was ever afforded to confront, cross-examine, or learn the identity of those who had informed against her. Plaintiff sought an order of reinstatement in the federal district court, contending that the method of dismissal failed to follow prescribed procedure and unconstitutionally punished her without judicial trial. Summary judgment was entered for the government. The court of appeals reversed in part and affirmed in part, holding that, although the three year ban was invalid because it inflicted punishment without judicial trial, the dismissal procedure was proper. On certiorari to the Supreme Court, held, affirmed, without opinion, by an evenly divided court Bailey v. Richardson, 341 U.S. 918, 71 S.Ct. 669 (1951).
William E. Beringer,
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-EXECUTIVE POWERS-RIGHT TO REMOVE EXECUTIVE EMPLOYEES WITHOUT JUDICIAL TRIAL,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol50/iss5/11