Baggett v. Bullitt
| Baggett v. Bullitt | |
|---|---|
| Argued March 24, 1964 Decided June 1, 1964 | |
| Full case name | Baggett, et al. v. Bullitt, et al. |
| Citations | 377 U.S. 360 (more) 84 S. Ct. 1316; 12 L. Ed. 2d 377; 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1140 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Holding | |
| A State cannot require an employee to take an unduly vague oath containing a promise of future conduct at the risk of prosecution for perjury or loss of employment, particularly where the exercise of First Amendment freedoms may thereby be deterred. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | White, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Goldberg |
| Dissent | Clark, joined by Harlan |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amends. I, XIV | |
Baggett v. Bullitt, 377 U.S. 360 (1964), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a state cannot require an employee to take an unduly vague oath containing a promise of future conduct at the risk of prosecution for perjury or loss of employment, particularly where the exercise of First Amendment freedoms may thereby be deterred.