Cox v. Louisiana II (1965)
Facts: Appellant Cox and 2,000 civil rights demonstrators conducted a march in the vicinity of the county courthouse in Baton Rouge to protest the arrest of 23 students arrested the previous day. Cox and his followers were convicted of violating a Louisiana law prohibiting picketing or parading "near a courthouse with the intent to interfere with justice or to influence judge, juror, or witness." When the demonstrators arrived, the police officer in charge first told them they could demonstrate in the park across the street (approx. 101 feet) from the courthouse steps. The police informed Cox that 101 feet away would not be "near" within the meaning of the statute.
The
County Sheriff arrived and ordered the demonstrators to move farther away from
the courthouse or to end their protest because they had been allocated only 7
minutes to protest and that such time had now elapsed.
When the protesters refused to move or to disperse, they were arrested.
Their convictions were affirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court.
Issue:
1.
Is the Louisiana statute unconstitutionally vague?
2.
Was the statute properly applied
by law enforcement officers?
Court held: Convictions reversed 5-4
Reasoning:
Mr.
Justice Goldberg wrote for the majority.
The
law is constitutional because it is narrowly drawn and serves as a
safeguard against disrupting the judicial process.
Even
though the law is valid, it was not applied in a constitutional manner by
law enforcement officials.
Significance: Narrowly drawn laws that regulate picketing but serve a significant government interest (e.g., protection of the judicial process) are permissible