|
|||||
Time, Place, Manner
Time, Place, Manner
A.
B.
Hague v CIO
1939 - Boston Commons Case overturned
1.
Mayor of
2.
a plurality of the SCOTUS
indicated that parks, streets, etc. must be open for
assembly and communication. Governments can regulate
but not prohibit such use.
3.
Strengthened
in Schnedier v State 1939
C.
Cox v New Hampshire 1941 SCOTUS upheld requirements for parade permits and reasonable fees
for "public convenience."
D.
Jamison v
E. In sum, regulation of public places must be in a non-discriminatory manner (content neutral), used only for public convenience and good order. At some locations like military bases, courts, schools, expression may be limited because of incompatibility with the property's normal use (Cox v La. II, 1965 and Grayned v Rockford, 1972).
F. In
PEA v PLEA 1983, (permitted one union exclusive access to school mailboxes
another union wanted to use) the SCOTUS created a three part analysis on access
to public property 1. Quintessential public forums e.g. streets, parks that have long been understood to be available for expression - open access rules apply 2. Public property the state has opened for expressive activities (e.g. auditoriums - open access rules apply 3. Public property not traditionally or designated for expressive use - open access rules DO NOT apply.
II.
Speech Plus (Pure speech is verbal expression only. Speech conjoined with conduct,
e.g. marching, is "speech plus).
Speech plus may receive less protection. A. SCOTUS has referred to Cox v La 1969 Goldberg opinion. p. 280 as a basis for this concept
B.
Flag
salutes. Stromberg v
C.
Draft Card
burning can be punished.
D.
Tinker v Des
Moines School Dist. 1969.
Arm bands as war protest were permitted as they not
disruptive of school activities.
E.
Flag
desecration can't be prohibited Street v NY 1969. THE precedent is Texas
v Johnson 1989. see p. 281-5. also
F.
Student dress
codes have not been ruled on by SCOTUS and lower courts vary on rulings
G.
Labor picketing is a
special form of expression which can be supervised by government
but is protected.
H.
Loudspeakers can be limited if there is no discretion
as to who gets use. I. Economic boycotts can be OK as political protest J. States cannot limit what candidates for office can say (e.g. judge candidates are permitted to announce their intended stands on pending issues.) 2002 MN case
SEE Tedford pp. 287-291 for a summary of additional issues under Speech plus, including:
|
last updated 3/22/2011