In RE McCONNELL

Summary

The Court held that a lawyer’s mere statement of intent to ask prohibited questions, without any actual obstruction of the court’s proceedings, does not satisfy the statutory requirement of obstruction for summary contempt under 18 U.S.C. §401, and therefore reversed the contempt conviction. Justice Harlan dissented, arguing the conviction should be affirmed and that contempt power includes abusive language and should not be limited to physical obstruction.