Edwards v. South Carolina

Justice Stewart's opinion, expressing the views of the majority of the Court, was referring to the so-called "time, place, and manner" restrictions which are often upheld in First Amendment cases. The assumption implicit in the "time, place, and manner" doctrine is that where it is possible to distinguish between the message certain speech is intended to convey and the manner in which it is communicated, the latter may be reasonably regulated even though the former may not. Here, however, the evidence "showed no more than that the opinions which [the students] were peaceably expressing were sufficiently opposed to the views of the majority of the community to attract a crowd and necessitate police protection." Far from being precise and narrowly-drawn, the common law crime outlined by the South Carolina Supreme Court was so broad and ambiguous as to permit the state to impermissibly interfere with the message as well as the medium. In effect, with Edwards, the Supreme Court made it impossible for a southern state beset by peaceful demonstrations to fight back with vague, overly broad laws. This case is yet another example of how the Court headed by Earl Warren helped to create a legal climate in which the Civil Rights movement could flourish.