Who is the US Supreme Court justice whose father was a founder of the American Fascist Party?
None of the US Supreme Court justices, or their relatives, have been associated with fascism.
There is an indefensible rumor circulating on the internet that Justice Antonin Scalia's father, S. Eugene Scalia, founded the American Fascist Party in 1934. Although we unintentionally helped perpetuate this misinformation, research indicates the rumor is false.
Salvatore Eugene Scalia was a first-generation Italian immigrant who obtained a PhD from Columbia University and taught Romance Languages at Brooklyn College. He translated a number of books from Italian to English, including Philip Mazzei's memoir, My Life and Wanderings.
There is no evidence suggesting Justice Scalia's father even supported fascism, although that was a common allegation against Italians in the years between WWI and WW II.
No American Fascist Party
Lawrence Dennis, an American diplomat and author, advocated fascism and talked of founding the "American Fascist Party" in the years following the Great Depression, but the group never materialized. Dennis and others were tried for sedition under the Smith Act (18 USC § 2385) in what became known as The Great Sedition Trial of 1944. The case ended in a mistrial when the judge died of a heart-attack.
It appears the closest organization to an American fascist party was the German-American Bund, supporters of Nazi Germany.
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
There is an indefensible rumor circulating on the internet that Justice Antonin Scalia's father, S. Eugene Scalia, founded the American Fascist Party in 1934. Although we unintentionally helped perpetuate this misinformation, research indicates the rumor is false.
Salvatore Eugene Scalia was a first-generation Italian immigrant who obtained a PhD from Columbia University and taught Romance Languages at Brooklyn College. He translated a number of books from Italian to English, including Philip Mazzei's memoir, My Life and Wanderings.
There is no evidence suggesting Justice Scalia's father even supported fascism, although that was a common allegation against Italians in the years between WWI and WW II.
No American Fascist Party
Lawrence Dennis, an American diplomat and author, advocated fascism and talked of founding the "American Fascist Party" in the years following the Great Depression, but the group never materialized. Dennis and others were tried for sedition under the Smith Act (18 USC § 2385) in what became known as The Great Sedition Trial of 1944. The case ended in a mistrial when the judge died of a heart-attack.
It appears the closest organization to an American fascist party was the German-American Bund, supporters of Nazi Germany.
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Was this answer useful?
Follow
With your quick wit, comebacks and style, you're by far our favorite on Vanderpump Rules! Through all the craziness on the show, how do you keep your sanity?
View Full Interview
Answered
Who were the first African-American and the first female US Supreme Court justices?
President Lyndon Johnson nominated Thurgood Marshall to be the first African-American US Supreme Court justice in 1967. Marshall retired from the Court in 1991 and died in 199…3. President Ronald Reagan nominated Sandra Day O'Connor to be the first female US Supreme Court justice in 1986. O'Connor retired from the Court in 2006. (MORE)
Answered
Was Dr. Ronald McNair the first African-American US Supreme Court justice?
No. Dr. McNair was an African-American physicist and astronaut who perished during the launch of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986. Former NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshal…l was the first African-American US Supreme Court justice. President Johnson nominated Marshall to the Court in 1967; he retired in 1991, and died in 1993. (MORE)
Answered
Was Sandra Day O'Connor the first African-American justice on the US Supreme Court?
No. Justice Thurgood Marshall was the first African-American appointed to the US Supreme Court. President Johnson nominated the former NAACP Legal Defense Fund chief counsel t…o the Court in 1967, where he served until his retirement in 1991. Justice Marshall died in 1993. (MORE)
Major Supreme Court Decisions in History
The Supreme Court is the judicial branch of the Federal Government. Its nine justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and each receives a lifetime …appointment. While the history of the Supreme Court is fascinating in and of itself, this article will address several of its major decisions. The Supreme Court's nine justices are the ultimate arbiters of the Constitution, and in that role, they have affected the course of this country.Marbury v. Madison is a remarkable decision for what was, in reality, an unremarkable case. William Marbury, a prospective Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia, sued James Madison, then President Jefferson's Secretary of State, when he and President Jefferson refused to seat Marbury and several other individuals. The Supreme Court ruled that Madison illegally withheld Marbury's commission, though Marbury never became a Justice of the Peace. It also ruled that the Supreme Court had the power to declare laws unconstitutional - the power now known as judicial review.In 1951, Oliver L. Brown, the father of a Topeka, Kansas student, and 12 other parents sued the Board of Education over its segregated schools. He was fighting an uphill battle - in 1896, the Supreme Court had ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson that segregation was legal. Separate but equal was equal, according to the Supreme Court. However, the plaintiffs in this case (which was, in fact, five combined cases) argued that the Constitution prohibited such treatment. Thurgood Marshall argued on behalf of the plaintiffs, and a unanimous Supreme Court sided with him. This marked the end of educational segregation. While full integration did not come easily, this case and its ruling began the movement.This case is very well known. When the detective on television arrests a criminal, the ever-familiar warning that he or she has, "the right to remain silent" soon follows. Anything he or she says can and will be used against him/her. As the criminal is placed in the police car, the detective asks if he or she understands his or her rights. While most people today know them by heart, it was not until the 1960s that police had to advise suspects of them. Miranda v. Arizona and its related cases stemmed from interrogations where suspects were unaware of their rights to an attorney and to avoid self-incrimination. The Supreme Court ruled that police interrogations were coercive and could be psychologically intimidating. Therefore, any statement that incriminates a defendant can only be used in court if the defendant making it knows that he or she understands his or her rights. The decision also stated that an officer conducting an interrogation must stop immediately once a defendant invokes these rights. The modern Supreme Court is increasingly visible within the public consciousness. However, it is not only recently that its decisions have impacted the lives of many Americans. The Supreme Court has made rulings and decisions that have influenced the way laws have been written, schools have been run, and police have behaved for many years. The Supreme Court, often without fanfare or publicity, has ruled on some of the most important issues of the day. (MORE)
The Supreme Court and the Case for Obama's Citizenship
In order to be President of the United States, one must be at least 35 years old, a resident of the United States for at least 14 years and a natural-born citizen. Qualifying …as a "natural-born citizen" depends on factors such as location of birth, date of birth and parental nationality. In the case of President Barack Obama, some of his opponents contested his natural-born citizenship, leading to rumors and speculations about his eligibility for the U.S. Presidency.While Obama's mother was a born citizen of the United States, his father was a Kenyan national. Additionally, it was unclear whether his parents were legally married according to U.S. law. To further complicate things, Obama's parents separated when he was a toddler. Soon after the separation, his mother married another foreign national and moved to Indonesia with Barack. These factors have created enough uncertainty for Obama's citizenship to be questioned.At the time of Obama's birth, the law stated that if only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of the child's birth, than that parent must have resided within the U.S. for at least ten years, five of which had to be after the age of 16. When Obama was born, his mother was 18, so she had not spent five years in the United States after the after of 16. However, this law applies to people born outside of the United States. Since Obama was born in Hawaii, this does not apply to him.The Supreme Court refused to hear a lawsuit challenging Obama's citizenship. Since President Obama was able to produce a valid birth certificate from Hawaii, he was clearly born in the United States. The Supreme Court did not have a reason to question the authenticity of the birth certificate.It is not unusual for opponents to question a candidate's citizenship. John McCain had his citizenship questioned. With the high stakes of a presidential election, opponents will grasp onto any possibility of bringing the opposition down.Mudslinging is always a factor in Presidential elections. In the case of Obama's citizenship, the evidence given against him seemed to be more manipulation of law than interpretation. The state of Hawaii repeatedly confirmed the authenticity of Obama's birth certificate. Therefore, all other claims about his parents' citizenship are moot.In 1964, the Republican nominee Barry Goldwater was challenged because he was born in Arizona before the territory was admitted as a state. (MORE)
10 Landmark Supreme Court Decisions
Roe v. Wade is one of the most famous rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court, and more than 40 years later, it is still one of the most hotly debated. The 1973 ruling stated that a…ny state law restricting a woman's right to have an abortion was unconstitutional. The Court admitted abortions late in pregnancy are problematic and could fall under legal control. However, Roe v. Wade protects a woman's right to choose abortion in the early part of pregnancy. Abortion continues to be one of the most controversial and contested topics in politics.It's because of a landmark case called Miranda v. Arizona that police officers must recite several rights to anyone they arrest. Police officers take great care to read anyone arrested their Miranda rights, because not doing so could jeopardize the ability to punish arrestees for crimes they committed. This exact scenario occurred with defendant Ernesto Miranda, who confessed to police that he raped and kidnapped a victim. Unfortunately, Miranda did so without knowing his Fifth Amendment right that protects him from incriminating himself. The case was thrown out and Miranda was released from prison.Following Gideon v. Wainwright, the Supreme Court's decision ensured that anyone accused of any crime would have legal representation despite their inability to afford it. The Court heard opposing arguments before justices unanimously agreed that everyone accused of committing a crime should have access to a lawyer. Before the ruling, only those accused of capital crimes like murder were provided legal representation despite their inability to pay.Engel v. Vitale was another landmark case heard by the Court in 1962. The heart of the argument was whether public schools should have policies that required the recital of prayers. The suit was filed in New York State by Jewish parents who did not want their children reciting certain Catholic prayers in school. The Court ruled that public school systems cannot force children to pray.In 1896, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state policies of keeping races separate in public places was constitutional. This tenet would become one of the most hotly contested rulings of the Court for the next 75 years until it was overturned in the 1950s. The issue reared its head in Louisiana when the state legislature passed a law called the "Separate Car Act," which required public transportation such as trains to provide separate cars for blacks and whites. Homer Plessy, a man with 1/8 black ancestry, challenged this law.Brown v. Board of Education was a groundbreaking Supreme Court decision at the heart of the Civil Rights battle of the 1950s and 1960s when much of the U.S., especially the South, practiced segregation of races in public places. The Court heard the case in 1954, and its ruling in favor of the plaintiffs, a group led by Oliver Brown, made the separation of races in public schools unconstitutional.The Dred Scott v. Sandford case preceded the Emancipation Proclamation by almost 10 years. However, that didn't stop Dred Scott and his wife from petitioning the courts to grant them freedom anyway. The pair filed suit in Missouri, technically a slave state, after having lived with their "owner" in Wisconsin, where slavery was not acknowledged. The Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution did not recognize blacks as citizens, and so they were afforded no protections under the law.At one time in the country's history, it was against the law for any interracial couple to marry. This practice was officially abandoned in 1966 when the Court ruled in favor of Richard Loving, a white man, and his black wife Mildred Jeter. In its ruling, the Court stated that the couple, despite state law in Virginia that made their union illegal, deserved the right to equal protection under federal law. The decision guaranteed personal freedom to choose a spouse without regard to race.This landmark suit marked the first time the U.S. Supreme Court had to intervene in a presidential election. This occurred because of the inability of the Florida Election Commission to properly count votes in the state. The two candidates were so close in electoral votes that Florida's 27 votes could make either candidate a victor. The Court ruled that there were no uniform counting practices in the state, and therefore a manual recount could not solve the problem and would, in fact, infringe on voters' equal protection rights. Based on the Court's ruling, George W. Bush became the 43rd President of the United States in 2000.In 2013, the Supreme Court decided that it is unconstitutional to define marriage only as the union between a man and a woman. This decision was a win for same-sex couples seeking to legally marry and enjoy all the benefits of their heterosexual counterparts. Individual states were still allowed to decide whether to allow same-sex marriages in their court systems, but the Court ensured that the federal government would recognize these couples as legally married. (MORE)
Locating Court Records for Your Genealogical Research
Court records are sometimes considered to be a genealogist's last resort but they are valuable for establishing family relationships and residence. The often supply useful fam…ily history information available from no other source. They should be among the first searched, rather than last. (MORE)
African American Women in Government: 7 Famous Firsts
In spite of all the odds they faced, the African American women on this list were successful in rising through the ranks of American government. It was their hard work and wil…lingness to be a "first" that proved their own abilities and paved the way for many more African American women to follow. (MORE)
TC TC
commented on this article
Fast Facts About the Military Justice System
Most Americans have a passing knowledge of the military justice system, be it from reports of courts-martial in the news, television shows like "JAG," or films like "A Few Goo…d Men." However, these media typically use the Uniform Code of Military Justice as set dressing, rather than exploring the military justice system to any great extent. Here are some interesting facts about the UCMJ, its own history and the other history that led up to its creation.The basis for U.S. military justice was originally the British Articles of War, which were established in 1774. Even the first derivatives of those Articles drafted for the American military, the American Articles of War and Articles for the Government of the Navy, were created and observed prior to the drafting of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.As different branches of the U.S. Armed Forces grew between the time of the Revolutionary War and World War I, very little change was made in the realm of military justice. It wasn't until the surge of military might that occurred in World War II that things had to change. Between the numbers of soldiers pulled from everyday life that were surprised by the differences between civilian courts and the handling of justice by the military and the variance in judicial practices from branch to branch, it became apparent that steps needed to be taken to standardize the system.Not long after the Department of Defense was established in 1947 to unite all of the Armed Forces under one central command, Secretary of Defense James Forrestal initiated a push to bring all of the military's branches under one common code of law.It would be another three years before Congress would enact the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or UCMJ. The inception of the UCMJ and its companion legislation, the Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM), provided a level foundation for legal proceedings across the entirety of the U.S. military. Further adjustments have been made since then to bring military justice closer into line with the civilian justice system, but the UCMJ still remains distinct despite these efforts.While the UCMJ does cover many crimes also punishable in civilian court, it also covers transgressions unique to a military setting. Offenses unique to the UCMJ include desertion, absence without leave, insubordination, dereliction of duty and other actions that can disrupt military operation or show disrespect for the chain of command. Additionally, there are provisions in the UCMJ for dealing with unruly prisoners, traitors and perpetrators of espionage. Even minutiae such as drunkenness on duty and driving under the influence have specific articles in the UCMJ, as the military has no patience for those unfit for duty in any capacity.These facts highlight but a few differences between the military justice system and the civilian justice system most everyday citizens know. Behind all the trumped-up threats of courts-martial in television and film, there's actually a well-developed justice system with a long-standing history.If a crime violates both military and state civilian law, the option exists for trial in a military court, a civilian court or both. A military member can't be tried for the same misconduct by both a military court and another federal court, but he can be tried for the same misconduct by both a military court and a state court. (MORE)
Answered
What political parties do the current US Supreme Court justices belong to?
US Supreme Court justices don't openly discuss partisan politics because they're supposed to be neutral; however, it's not too difficult to infer certain information based on …the political ideology of the appointing Presidents. On the current Court: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., appointed by George W. Bush (R) in 2005 Elena Kagan, appointed by Barack Obama (D) in 2011 Sonia Sotomayor, appointed by Barack Obama (D) in 2010 (self-proclaimed Independent) Samuel Alito, appointed by George W. Bush (R) in 2006 Stephen Breyer, appointed by Bill Clinton (D) in 1994 Ruth Bader Ginsburg, appointed by Bill Clinton (D) in 1993 Clarence Thomas, appointed by George H. W. Bush (R) in 1991 Anthony Kennedy, appointed by Ronald Reagan (R) in 1988 Antonin Scalia, appointed by Ronald Reagan (R) in 1986 (MORE)
Answered
Do US Supreme Court justices have to be American citizens?
Unlike its requirement that the President be a "natural born" citizen, and the Senators and Representatives be at least "naturalized," the Constitution is silent on the citize…nship and residency requirements for a Supreme Court Justice. Naturalized citizens are eligible to serve on the Court. In order to become a naturalized citizen, a person must be at least 18 years old and must have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least five years, or for three years, if married to and continuously living with a spouse who's an American citizen. A person voluntarily serving in the US military is eligible to apply for citizenship after one year of service, or within six month of being honorably discharged. Non-citizen residents of the United States may or may not be legally eligible for a position on the Court, but politically, the likelihood of a non-citizen being nominated or confirmed by the Senate is virtually nil. For more information on the Supreme Court justice qualifications, see Related Questions, below. (MORE)
Answered
Who was the US Supreme Court Chief Justice whose opinion defined judicial review?
Chief Justice John Marshall, in his opinion in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US (Cranch 1) 137 (1803). For more information about Marbury v. Madison, see Related Links, below.
