Legal Opinion

Helstoski v. Meanor

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided June 18, 1979No. 78-546PublishedCited by 409 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Burgee

The question in this case is whether mandamus is an appropriate means of challenging the validity of an indictment of a Member of Congress on the ground that it violates the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution.1 The Court of Appeals declined to issue the writ. We affirm.

*502I

Petitioner Helstoski served in the United States Congress from 1965 through 1976 as a Representative from New Jersey. In 1974, the Department of Justice began investigating reported political corruption, including allegations that aliens had paid money for the introduction and processing of private bills which would…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Dombrowski v. EastlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. United States v. BrewsterSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by409 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Nixon v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Digital Equipment Corp. v. Desktop Direct, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Flanagan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

404 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API