The plea set up by those of the defendants who were members of the House is a good defence, and the judgment of the court overruling the demurrer to it and giving judgment for those defendants will be affirmed. As to Thompson, the judgment reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.
Hallet Kilbourn was subpoenaed to testify before a Special Committee established by the House of Representatives to investigate the bankruptcy of Jay Cooke & Company. Though he appeared, he refused to answer any questions and did not tender requested documents. John G. Thompson, Sergeant-At-Arms for the House, took Kilbourn into custody. Kilbourn continued to refuse to testify and provided no explanation for his refusal. The House resolved that Kilbourn was in contempt and should be held in custody until he agreed to testify and produce the requested documents. The Court found that the House did have the power to punish for contempt. However, House members could not be sued for false imprisonment as they were exercising their official duties and protected by the Speech and Debate Clause, Art. I, § 6, cl. 1. In addition the Supreme Court established several limits in the scope of investigations, called the "Kilbourn Test".
McGeary, M. Nelson (1948). "The Congressional Power of Investigation". Nebraska Law Review. 28: 516. ISSN 0047-9209.
Morgan, Gerald D. (1949). "Congressional Investigations and Judicial Review: Kilbourn v. Thompson Revisited". California Law Review. California Law Review, Inc. 37 (4): 556–574. doi:10.2307/3477687. JSTOR 3477687.
External linksedit
Works related to Kilbourn v. Thompson at Wikisource
Text of Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103U.S. 168 (1880) is available from:CornellJustiaLibrary of CongressOpenJurist
kilbourn, thompson, 1880, united, states, supreme, court, case, that, dealt, with, question, whether, united, states, house, representatives, compel, testimony, supreme, court, united, statesdecided, february, 1881full, case, namehallet, kilbourn, john, thomps. Kilbourn v Thompson 103 U S 168 1880 was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the question whether or not the United States House of Representatives may compel testimony Kilbourn v ThompsonSupreme Court of the United StatesDecided February 28 1881Full case nameHallet Kilbourn v John G Thompson et al Citations103 U S 168 more 26 L Ed 377HoldingThe plea set up by those of the defendants who were members of the House is a good defence and the judgment of the court overruling the demurrer to it and giving judgment for those defendants will be affirmed As to Thompson the judgment reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings Court membershipChief Justice Morrison Waite Associate Justices Nathan Clifford Samuel F MillerStephen J Field Joseph P BradleyWard Hunt John M HarlanWilliam B WoodsCase opinionMajorityMiller joined by unanimousHallet Kilbourn was subpoenaed to testify before a Special Committee established by the House of Representatives to investigate the bankruptcy of Jay Cooke amp Company Though he appeared he refused to answer any questions and did not tender requested documents John G Thompson Sergeant At Arms for the House took Kilbourn into custody Kilbourn continued to refuse to testify and provided no explanation for his refusal The House resolved that Kilbourn was in contempt and should be held in custody until he agreed to testify and produce the requested documents The Court found that the House did have the power to punish for contempt However House members could not be sued for false imprisonment as they were exercising their official duties and protected by the Speech and Debate Clause Art I 6 cl 1 In addition the Supreme Court established several limits in the scope of investigations called the Kilbourn Test Contents 1 The Kilbourn Test 2 See also 3 Further reading 4 External linksThe Kilbourn Test edit 1 Inquiries must not invade areas constitutionally reserved to the courts or the executive 2 Inquiries must deal with subjects on which Congress could validly legislate 3 The resolution authorizing the investigation must specify a congressional interest in legislating on that subject 4 Where the inquiry can result in no valid legislation then the Private affairs of individuals are not valid targets for inquirySee also editList of United States Supreme Court cases volume 103 Calder v Bull 3 U S 386 1798 Ex parte Milligan 71 U S 2 1866 United States v Cruikshank 92 U S 542 1876 Further reading editMcGeary M Nelson 1948 The Congressional Power of Investigation Nebraska Law Review 28 516 ISSN 0047 9209 Morgan Gerald D 1949 Congressional Investigations and Judicial Review Kilbourn v Thompson Revisited California Law Review California Law Review Inc 37 4 556 574 doi 10 2307 3477687 JSTOR 3477687 External links edit nbsp Works related to Kilbourn v Thompson at Wikisource Text of Kilbourn v Thompson 103 U S 168 1880 is available from Cornell Justia Library of Congress OpenJurist The road to impeachment nbsp This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Kilbourn v Thompson amp oldid 1175144600, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
