Ex parte Garland

Infobox SCOTUS case
Litigants=Ex parte Garland
ArgueDate=December 15
ArgueDateB=22
ArgueYear=1865
ReargueDateA=March 13
ReargueDateB=15
ReargueYear=1866
DecideDate=January 14
DecideYear=1867
FullName=Ex parte Garland
USVol=71
USPage=333
Citation=
Prior=
Subsequent=
Holding=Congress cannot punish a person for a crime for which the person has been pardoned.
SCOTUS=1865-1867
Majority=Field
JoinMajority=Wayne, Nelson, Grier, Clifford
Dissent=Miller
JoinDissent=Chase, Swayne, Davis
LawsApplied=

"Ex parte Garland", ussc|71|333|1866, was an important United States Supreme Court case involving the disbarment of former Confederate officials.

Case

In January of 1865 the Congress of the United States passed a law that effectively debarred former members of the Confederate government by requiring a loyalty oath be recited by any Federal court officer affirming that the officer had never served in the Confederate government.

Augustus Hill Garland, an attorney and former Confederate Senator from Arkansas, had previously received a pardon from President Andrew Johnson. Garland came before the court and pleaded that the act of Congress was a bill of attainder and an "ex post facto" law which unfairly punished him for the crime he had been pardoned for and was therefore unconstitutional.

Decision

In a 5-4 vote the Supreme Court ruled that the law was indeed a bill of attainder and an "ex post facto" law. The court ruled that Garland was beyond the reach of punishment of any kind due to his prior presidential pardon. The court also stated that counselors are officers of the court and not officers of the United States, and that their removal was an exercise of judicial power and not legislative power. The law was struck down, opening the way for former Confederate government officials to return to positions within the federal judiciary.

External links

* [http://laws.findlaw.com/us/71/333.html Full text of the decision courtesy of Findlaw.com]