United States v. Romano
382 U.S. 136 · Decided November 22, 1965 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
United States v. Romano was decided on November 22, 1965 unanimously (9–0). The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice Byron R. White wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, miscellaneous” in the Due Process area. SCDB records that the Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 382 U.S. 136 · 86 S. Ct. 279 · 15 L. Ed. 2d 210 · 1965 U.S. LEXIS 207
- Docket number
- 2
- Decided
- November 22, 1965
- Argued
- October 14, 1965
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Byron R. White
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, miscellaneous
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- 26 U.S.C. § 5601
- Type of law
- Infrequently litigated statute
- Held unconstitutional
- An act of Congress
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Majority | |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Abe Fortas | Special concurrence |
Full case caption
United States v. Romano et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1965-014, docket 1965-014-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, miscellaneous”
- Giaccio v. PennsylvaniaLaw held unconstitutional
- Holt v. Virginia
- Johnson v. Florida
- Turner v. United StatesLaw held unconstitutional
- Hannah v. Larche
- Palmer v. City of EuclidLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: 26 U.S.C. § 5601
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Giaccio v. PennsylvaniaLaw held unconstitutional
- Pate v. Robinson
- Westbrook v. Arizona
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error