Misplaced Pages

Carroll v. Town of Princess Anne

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
(Redirected from Carroll v. Princess Anne)

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Carroll v. Town of Princess Anne" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (February 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
1968 United States Supreme Court case
Carroll v. Town of Princess Anne
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 21, 1968
Decided November 19, 1968
Full case nameJoseph Carroll, et al. v. President and Commissioners of Princess Anne
Citations393 U.S. 175 (more)89 S. Ct. 347; 21 L. Ed. 2d 325
Holding
Generally, a state cannot preemptively prohibit persons from holding a public meeting without first notifying them and giving them an opportunity to challenge the decision.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · William O. Douglas
John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan Jr.
Potter Stewart · Byron White
Abe Fortas · Thurgood Marshall
Case opinions
MajorityFortas, joined by Warren, Douglas, Brennan, Harlan, Stewart, White, Marshall
ConcurrenceBlack
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I, XIV

Carroll v. Town of Princess Anne, 393 U.S. 175 (1968), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a state cannot preemptively prohibit persons from holding a public meeting, without first notifying the persons involved, and providing the persons an opportunity to argue the decision, unless the moving party can show (1) that they made efforts to give notice, and (2) explain the reasons why such notice should not be required.

Background

A white supremacist group, the National States Rights Party, held a rally in Princess Anne, Maryland, on August 6, 1966. They intended to hold another public meeting the following day, but local citizens persuaded a Circuit Court judge to issue a 10-day restraining order, prohibiting the group from holding any rally "which will tend to disturb and endanger the citizens of the County". The Party was not given any advance notice of the restraining order, nor given an opportunity to argue against it. The Circuit Court then issued a 10-month restraining order. The Maryland court of appeals overturned the 10 month order, but upheld the 10 day order. The Party appealed to the Supreme Court.

Opinion of the Court

The Supreme Court held that the 14th Amendment's guarantee of due process required the state to provide the group with notice and a hearing before a restraining order could be issued. Justice Black concurred in the judgment.

The 10 day restraining order was set aside.

Notes and references

  1. Graham, Fred P. (November 20, 1968). "High Court Limits Right to Ban Rallies; HIGH COURT CURBS BANS ON RALLIES". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved May 28, 2018.

External links

U.S. Supreme Court Freedom of Speech Clause case law
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Unprotected speech
Clear and
present danger

and imminent
lawless action
Defamation and
false speech
Fighting words and
the heckler's veto
True threats and
threatening the
President of the
United States
Obscenity
Speech integral
to criminal conduct
Strict scrutiny
Overbreadth and
Vagueness doctrines
Symbolic speech
versus conduct
Content-based
restrictions
Content-neutral
restrictions
In the
public forum
Designated
public forum
Nonpublic
forum
Compelled speech
Compelled subsidy
of others' speech
Government grants
and subsidies
Government speech
Loyalty oaths
School speech
Public employees
Hatch Act and
similar laws
Licensing and
restriction of speech
Commercial speech
Campaign finance and
political speech
Anonymous speech
State action
Official retaliation
Boycotts
Prisons
Categories: