Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon.
The Oregon statute as applied to the particular charge as defined by the state court is repugnant to the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The judgment of conviction is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Dirk De Jonge addressed an audience regarding jail conditions in the county and a maritime strike in progress in Portland on July 27, 1934. A raid on the meeting was carried out by Portland police. De Jonge was arrested and charged with violating the State's criminal syndicalism statute, or "the doctrine which advocates crime, physical violence, sabotage or any unlawful acts or methods as a means of accomplishing or effecting industrial or political change or revolution." Once convicted, De Jonge motioned for an acquittal, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to warrant his conviction. The State Supreme Court disagreed with De Jonge, and noted that the indictment did not charge De Jonge with criminal syndicalism, but rather that he "presided at, conducted and assisted in conducting an assemblage of persons, organization, society and group called by the Communist Party, which was unlawfully teaching and advocating in Multnomah county the doctrine of criminal syndicalism and sabotage."
Chafee, Zechariah (1941). Free Speech in the United States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. pp. 384–388.
Friendly, Fred; Elliott, Martha (1984). "Protecting ‘The Thought We Hate’". The Constitution: That Delicate Balance. New York: Random House. pp. 68–88. ISBN0-394-54074-3.Cite uses deprecated parameters (help)