The anti-communist oath provisions generated extensive public debate, and generated disputes before the Supreme Court several times. The Taft-Hartley oath first reached the court in American Communications Ass'n v. Douds, , in which the court held 5-to-1 that the oath did not violate the First Amendment, was not an "ex post facto" law or bill of attainder in violation of , and was not a "test oath" in violation of Article Six. The issue again came before the court in Garner v. Board of Public Works, , in which the court unanimously held that a municipal loyalty oath was not an "ex post facto law" or bill of attainder. It came before the court yet a third time in "Wieman v. Updegraff", . This time, the outcome was radically different. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state loyalty oath legislation violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In 1965, the Supreme Court held 5-to-4 that the anti-communist oath was a bill of attainder in "United States v. Brown", . The Supreme Court essentially overturned "Douds", but did not formally do so.