When William Schneiderman and California Communists Defeated the Smith Act

SubscribeSign in

When William Schneiderman and California Communists Defeated the Smith Act<br>In 1948 the US government with Supreme Court approval weaponised the Smith Act against the CPUSA. After a decade those threatened Communists challenged the Smith Act and US anticommunism and won.<br>Sebastian<br>Aug 19, 2026

Share

Earlier this week I had an article published in Geese Magazine about the first Supreme Court trial of William Schneiderman, the chairman of the California Communist Party. I would heavily suggest giving it a read. It’s not only a fascinating story, it’s also useful reading for the article below. This article is something of an extended afterword to that article, taking the chance to explore William Schneiderman’s second Supreme Court Trial, in 1957, when he took on the Smith Act and the extended forces of Mccarythism.

William Schneiderman was the state chairman of the California Communist Party from 1937 to 1964. It was a position that brought him into two major legal disputes in the United States for his political views. In 1939 Schneiderman, who was originally born in pre-Soviet Russia and only naturalised as a US citizen in 1927, faced a battle to retain his citizenship against the US government. Schneiderman would eventually win that case in 1943, having taken it all the way to the Supreme Court. However, like many Communists in that time, Schneiderman remained entangled in legal matters. Between 1943 and 1953 he continued to follow the cases of his friend and colleague Harry Bridges, an Australian-born West Coast Labor leader who was targetted for deportation.1

William Schneiderman on the witness stand during one of Harry Bridge’s deportation trials, Source: Wikimedia Commons.<br>Then, as his friend finally won before the Supreme Court, and earned his own right to become a US citizen, Schneiderman watched as another set of Communists, this time from the East Coast, were unable to defeat the US government’s prosecution that they, by being members of CPUSA, had conspired to overthrow the US government. The act that gave the US such powers to pursue that prosecution was implemented just after the US came after Schneiderman’s citizenship, but had wouldn’t be used to it’s full extent until the political environment became fertile for anticommunist fervor.<br>The Smith Act (1940) and the Rise of Joseph Mccarthy.

As Europe descended into a second major continental conflict in 25 years, the US was dealing with extensive internal debates about what to do about this new age of ideological violence and competition. While the nation’s population remained largely isolationist, leading both major party candidates to advocate at least cautious isolationism (even if the winning candidate, Franklin Roosevelt, was notably more favorable to intervention), the government was also looking to control the rise of movements associated with the European ideologies, in particular the pro-Nazi US-German Bund, and the Comintern aligned Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA). This led to the passage of the Smith Act, intended to be a simpler way for the US to target “internal enemies” and groups who plotted to overthrow the US government and constitution.2<br>Share<br>By 1941, one year after its passage, the Smith Act use for targetting the US left was largely ignored because the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor and the German invasion of the USSR made allies out of the United States and the Communist Soviet Union. This did not stop persectution of Communists in the United States (Schneiderman himself remained on trial throughout the height of US-Soviet collaboration), but it certainly slowed it, as geopolitics made such targettings difficult.3 But then, in 1945, a number of events conspired to once again threaten the left half of the New Deal’s historic left-liberal coalition.<br>First was the death of FDR, and the rise of a more conservative, Southern Democrat in his VP Harry Truman to replace him. Truman was significantly more anticommunist than FDR had been, and certainly less tactful in his handling of Joseph Stalin and US-Soviet relations. By 1948 Truman and the US were firmly in a cold war with the leading Communist state, and the trials like those of Julius and Ethel Rosenburg who were accused of sharing nuclear secrets with the Soviet Union began shifting the popular environment against Communism’s acceptability within American society.<br>One thing Truman initially struggled with was popularity. When he took over from Roosevelt he got the obvious boost of being a wartime President, who oversaw the successful conclusion of the 2nd World War. However, he also inherited a government and party that had now held power for nearly 15 years, and that he struggled initially to inspire to a long term vision in the way Roosevelt’s post-war promise of a continued transformative Social Democratic state securing the “Four Freedoms” galvanized...