Brown v. Louisiana

This case, was the fourth in a four-year-period in which Louisiana's breach of peace statute was used to stop a peaceful demonstration over discriminatory practices. Garner v. Louisiana (1961) involved a sit-in at a lunch counter to protest service for whites only. In Taylor v. Louisiana (1962) blacks again protested the presence of bus depot that was for white customers only. In Cox v. Louisiana (1965) a man led a demonstration near the courthouse and jail to protest the arrest of other demonstrations. Each of the protests were orderly and peaceful and were over discriminatory practices that denied the protesters' rights that were guaranteed to them under the Constitution.

The Audubon Regional Library in Clinton, Louisiana, Parish of East Feliciana did not serve blacks. Instead blacks were expected to use one of two bookmobiles. The red bookmobile served whites and the blue bookmobile served blacks. On 7 March 1964, five young black males entered the adult reading room. One of the men, Brown, requested a book, "The Story of the Negro," by Arna Bontemps. The assistant librarian, after checking the card catalogue, discovered that the library did not have the book. She told Brown she would request it from the state library and he could pick it up from the bookmobile or it could be mailed to him. After the men failed to leave the library, the assistant librarian requested that they go. They did not. Brown sat down and the others stood nearby. The assistant librarian then went to the head librarian who also requested that the men leave. They did not. A short time later the sheriff arrived and asked the men to leave. Again, they refused. The sheriff arrested them. He had been notified that morning that members of the Congress of Racial Equality were planning a "sit-in" at the library. The sheriff witnessed the men enter the library and notified his deputies. The men were arrested and charged with intention to provoke a breach of peace and failure or refusal to leave a public building when ordered to do so.

The five men were tried and found guilty. Brown was sentenced to pay $150 for court costs or spend 90 days in jail. The four other men were sentenced to $35 for court costs or 15 days in jail. Under Louisiana law, the convictions were not appealable. The Louisiana Supreme Court denied their request for discretionary review because they could find no error. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

In writing for the majority, Justice Fortas, first examined whether the protesters could be convicted simply for refusing to leave the library. He concluded that they could not since their protest was peaceful and blacks could not be denied access to the library, since whites were allowed inside. He then reviewed the conduct of the men while they were in the public room, and again, found that they had not violated the statue because "They sat and stood in the room, quietly, as monuments of protest against the segregation of the library." The state argued that the men were in fact served and by remaining proved their intention to disturb the peace and upset the librarian. However, Justice Fortas concluded that the arrest was a violation of the men's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights that guarantee freedom of speech and assembly and the right to ask the government for redress of grievances. He wrote:

As this Court has repeatedly stated, these rights are not confined to verbal expression. They embrace appropriate types of action which certainly include the right to peaceable and orderly manner to protest by silent and reproachful presence, in a place where the protester has every right to be, the unconstitutional segregation of public facilities.

In a sharply worded dissenting opinion Justice Black took issue with the majority's reasoning. He disagreed that the Constitution prohibits any state from making "sit-ins" or "stand-ups" in public libraries illegal. Second, Black argued that the previous breach of the peace cases in Louisiana differed from Brown v. Louisiana. The decision in Garner was based on an older version of the breach of the peace statute. In Taylor, the Court decided that individuals could not be charged under the breach of the peace statute, if they were only protesting a white-only policy. Additionally, there was no evidence in that case that individuals who were only present to protest continued to do so after being asked to leave. In Cox v. Louisiana the issue involved was picketing and protesting on public streets. Black wrote:

Public buildings such as libraries, schoolhouses, fire departments, courthouses, and executive mansions are maintained to perform certain specific and vital functions. Order and tranquillity of a sort entirely unknown to the public streets are essential to their normal operation. Contrary to the implications of the prevailing opinion it is incomprehensible to me that a State must measure disturbances in its libraries and on the streets with identical standards . . . In the public building, unlike the street, peace and quiet is a fast and necessary rule, and as a result there is much less room for police officers to abuse their authority in enforcing the public building part of the statute.

Justice Black also disagreed with the majority opinion that Louisiana was using the breach of peace statute to enforce a policy of denying use of the library based on race. There was no racial discrimination practiced in this case because the assistant librarian not only looked for the book that Brown requested, but also sent Brown the book two weeks later.