Dissent Jackson | Date decided 1954 | |
Full case name United States v. Harriss, et al. Citations 347 U.S. 612 (more)74 S. Ct. 808; 98 L. Ed. 989; 1954 U.S. LEXIS 2657 Prior history Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Majority Warren, joined by Reed, Frankfurter, Burton, Minton Dissent Douglas, joined by Black Similar Buckley v Valeo, Miller v California, New York Times Co v Sullivan, McCulloch v Maryland | ||
United States v. Harriss, 347 U.S. 612 (1954), was a U.S. Supreme Court case applied directly to the Regulation of Lobbying Act.
Proceedings and outcome
Lobbyists challenged the Regulation of Lobbying Act for being unconstitutionally vague and unclear. In Harriss, the Supreme Court responded by upholding the act's constitutionality, but also by narrowing the scope and application of the act. The Court ruled that the act applies only to paid lobbyists who directly communicate with members of Congress on pending or proposed federal legislation. This means that lobbyists who visit with congressional staff members rather than members of Congress themselves are not considered lobbyists. In addition, the act covers only attempts to influence the passage or defeat of legislation in Congress, and excludes other congressional activities. Further, the act applies to and restricts only individuals who spend at least half of their time lobbying.