Cox v. Louisiana

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, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness or court officer, in the discharge of his duty." Goldberg wrote that the law was appropriately narrowly written to protect the state's judicial system from pressures that demonstrations near a courthouse might create. The restriction did not infringe on free speech and assembly and was, therefore, valid. Goldberg also found that, in applying the statute, Louisiana could arrest and convict for the kind of demonstration which occurred near the Baton Rouge courthouse. However, the majority voted to reverse the conviction on the grounds that prior permission was granted by the police to conduct the demonstration on the far side of the street from the courthouse steps. Goldberg wrote, "to permit him to be convicted for exercising the privilege they told him was available would be to allow a type of entrapment violative of the Due Process Clause."