Additional Topics
The decision effectively struck down as "unconstitutionally vague" state and local laws. The statutes were presumably intended to prevent breaches of the peace, but actually were designed to restrict and punish unpopular speech. The landmark ruling, however, reaffirmed the state and municipal governments' responsibility to regulate the time, place, and manner in which public places may be used by …
On 14 December 1961, black students from Southern University picketed stores with racially segregated lunch counter service in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and urged a boycott of those stores as part of a general protest against segregation. The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) organized the demonstration. The students were arrested and lodged in the parish jail located above the courthouse building. …
The Court unanimously ruled to set aside the convictions on the breach of the peace charge. Goldberg discussed five points in this reversal. 1. In considering the testimony of sheriff's officers, apparently the one objectionable part of the entire protest program came at the conclusion of Cox's speech when he urged students to go uptown and sit at lunch counters. The Court reasoned that this part …
On this second charge, the Court voted 7-2 for reversal. Justices Byron R. White and John M. Harlan II dissented. Goldberg wrote that the Louisiana Obstructing Public Passages law as written "precludes all street assemblies and parades, (yet) it has not been so applied and enforced by the Baton Rouge authorities." City officials testified clearly that certain meetings and parades are permitted in …
The appeal on the third charge of picketing before a courthouse was reported separately as Cox II. The Court reversed the conviction by a vote of 5-4. Goldberg again wrote for the majority. The conviction was for violations of a Louisiana law which prohibited picketing or parading in or near a state court "with the intent of interfering with, obstructing or impeding the administration of justice, …
In public forums, Cox I affirmed the use of certain prerequisites, such as violence or the threat of violence or fighting words, to establish a true breach of peace. The Court reaffirmed that speech which merely produces discussion, arouses, disquiets, or angers is constitutionally protected. The Court also confirmed the duty of states or municipalities to assure the safety of its public places. G…
The term "breach of peace" originated in England when kings reigned supreme. The king had a right to peace in his country and anyone disturbing the king's peace was arrested. Breach of peace law originated in common-law but in many states is governed by statute, a law passed by a legislative body. A similar term, "disorderly conduct," is strictly statutory law. Both terms refer to an intentional d…
Citing this material
Please include a link to this page if you have found this material useful for research or writing a related article. Content on this website is from high-quality, licensed material originally published in print form. You can always be sure you're reading unbiased, factual, and accurate information.
Highlight the text below, right-click, and select “copy”. Paste the link into your website, email, or any other HTML document.
User Comments
over 4 years ago
I am not a lawyer. My background is in criminal justice. I was reading this section because I noticed in the Federal Register that the Nuclear Reg Commission has specified in advance of a meeting what public attendees can say, do, or present such as posters or wearing t-shirts. Inasmuch as conduct during these meetings must show some violent or overtly disruptive behavior how can a federal agency beforehand specify what the public can or cannot do in what seems to me to be a violation of constitutional priciple.