◆ SpookStack

; _ id ; an | ermer ¥. Gasey (1958) % LW. 4509 °3 ane attlas “hogs ads pees | ce Proceeding for an order compelling city spe tc to : . retastate petitioner in position of conductor 1s the. city's subway systes. The Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County, ‘Wow York, granted the authority's metion for dismissal and petitioner appealed, The Supreme Court, Appellate Divisies, Second Judicial Department, affirmed by a divided court, amd petitioner appealed. ‘The Court ef Appeals bela that under Security Risk Law, transit authority wes authorized to discharge en employee ocoupying pesition ef subway conductor in its. ageacy which had been designated & "security ageacy™ ender such law; merely upon a showing that when asked if he was "then" a member of the Communi st Party, he _ refused te answer, aad gave as a reason for 80 refusing. that his. answer might tend to incriminate him within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to the Federal Constitution. | “ ”, | The U, S, Supreme Court, in affirming the state court decision, said im the course of its opinion: The issue them reduces to the narrow question whether the : conclusion which could otherwise be reached from appellant's refusal to answer is constitutionally barred because his refusal was accompanied by the assertion of a Sth amendment privilege. We think it does not. -The Federal privilege ageiest self-incrimination was not available +o ap- pellant throagh the l4th amendment in this state investigation. Knapp v. Schweitzer (1958) 26 L.W, 4526; Adamson v. Califeraia (1947) 332 0.5. 46. And we see no merit in. appellant's suggestion that, despite the teachings of these cases, the plea was, available to him in this _Angtance + sean re A A OI I TE | AR AEE Be AI wee - 4