Talk:Yates v. United States

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Law Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Supreme Court infobox is now in, has been for some time apparently. This case needs more work, but is more usable now than it was before. Not sure where someone got the idea that the convictions were upheld at the Supreme Court... they may have been (I honestly don't know) on retrial at the district court, but the Supreme Court definitely struck the convictions and sent back for new trials. As far as sources for that, look at the majority opinion text... not sure what better reference one wants :) The Oyez Project's page is also useful; I've added it as a reference.76.190.208.143 (talk) 06:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black quote

The Black quote is a little strange, coming as it does after a discussion of what the Court held, since Black's opinion was not the opinion of the court, but rather a minority opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, to which only he and Douglas subscribed. It's certainly worth mentioning, but it should be mentioned in a way that doesn't erroneously imply that it is what the Court held. --Delirium 00:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, the Black quote is strange - I left it in merely because it is kind of interesting, and I didn't have time to dig out a similarly salacious quote from any other opinion. The real money in Yates v. US is in the narrowing of the Smith Act and the distinction between advocacy to action and mere belief.76.190.208.143 (talk) 06:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]