ABSTRACT
Barenblatt v. United States is a leading case involving the balance between the congressional power of investigation and the First Amendment protections of free expression and assembly. Lloyd Barenblatt, professor of psychology at Vassar College and former graduate student at the University of Michigan, refused to answer the committee's questions concerning his past political associations. John Watkins, a former labor union president, and Barenblatt asserted that House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) had no power to compel answers, and Congress cited both men for contempt. The Court, in a five-four decision written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, chose to uphold Barenblatt's conviction. It narrowly interpreted Watkins to determine that HUAC had fully apprised Barenblatt of the subject and pertinence of his questioning. Justice Hugo L. Black supported Barenblatt's right to make political mistakes. Black's opinion stands as a testament to the value of an individual's rights to speak and to associate freely without being publicly shamed and castigated for professing beliefs that others deem unpopular.
