ABSTRACT
The key to the Court's decision lies in Junius Scales's longtime party activism. Scales v. United States, 367 US 203, is the only Supreme Court case in which an individual was convicted solely under the membership clause of the Smith Act of 1940, the major antisubversive legislation used against the Communist Party's leadership during the Cold War. The jury instructions given during Scales's trial made a distinction and required the jury to find that Scales had devoted substantial time to furthering the party's goal of violent revolution. This instruction also distinguished Scales from Noto v. United States, 367 US 290, decided the same day, in which the Court found that the defendants had engaged in advocating Communist doctrine but had not actively promoted the doctrine of violent revolution. Writing for the Court, Justice John M. Harlan relied on a series of previous Court cases that distinguished between "nominal" and "active" party membership.
