| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | Protesters picketing a school over racial inequality (in cheerleading, inter alia) run afoul of ordinances. Some men are arrested for picketing and for disturbing the school's operations. |
| Posture: | Convicted at trial. Affirmed by IL SC. Cert. granted. |
| Issue: | Are the anti-picketing and anti-school noise regulations either overbroad or vague? |
| Holding: | Affirmed in part, reversed in part. The anti-picketing law is unconstitutional, but the noise one is fine. |
| Rule: | A state regulation that impacts 1A rights can withstand scrutiny if it is narrowly tailored to a legitimate purpose. |
| Reasoning: | This isn't vague: there's some interpretation necessary, but it
doesn't criminalize thoughts, just things that cause actual
disruption to school.
And it's not overbroad: it is constrained in terms of both time of day (i.e., while school is in session) and place (at a school). |
| Dicta: | Douglas, dissenting: this is straight-up 1A speech, and it's about race, which is a poster-child 1A issue. Should have been reversed as to both counts. |