Citation network
Adderly Vs. Florida
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 14, 1966
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 39 (1966) U.S. Supreme Court Adderly v. FloridaSearch
-
U.S. 39 (1966) Adderly v. FloridaSearch
-
kind, and is not unconstitutionally vague, as were the common law breach of the peace statutes invalidated in Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
Carolina, 372 U. S. 229 , and Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
U. S. 559 . Pp. 385 U. S. 41 -43. 2. The doctrine of abatement is inapplicable here. Hamm v. CitySearch
-
from the beginning of this case that it is controlled by and must be reversed because of our prior cases of Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
as to jeopardize speech, press, assembly and petition, under the constitutional doctrine enunciated in Cantwell v. ConnecticutSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 307 -308, and followed in many subsequent cases. And it was on this same ground of vagueness that, in Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
and clear. II Petitioners in this Court invoke the doctrine of abatement announced by this Court in Hamm v. CitySearch
-
If true, this would be a denial of due process under Garner v. LouisianaSearch
-
U. S. 157 , and Thompson v. CitySearch
-
concept of constitutional law was vigorously and forthrightly rejected in two of the cases petitioners rely on, Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
In Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
FORTAS concur, dissenting. The First Amendment, applicable to the States by reason of the Fourteenth ( Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
The jailhouse, like an executive mansion, a legislative chamber, a courthouse, or the statehouse itself ( Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
to appearing before the local city council, or writing letters to the President or Governor or Mayor. See NAACP v. ButtonSearch
-
songs. And history shows that a song can be a powerful tool of protest. See Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
right to go peacefully on public property to exercise First Amendment rights. As Mr. Justice Roberts wrote in Hague v. CIOSearch
-
Such was the case of Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
State, as well as to the legislature. Supra at 372 U. S. 235 . Edwards was in the tradition of Cox v. NewSearch
-
of grievances to the other interests inhering in the uses to which the public property is normally put. See Cox v. NewSearch
-
Poulos v. NewSearch
-
But this is quite different from saying that all public places are off limits to people with grievances. See Hague v. CIOSearch
-
Cox v. NewSearch
-
Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
of ideas, especially the constitutional right to assemble and petition for redress of grievances. See Hague v. CIOSearch
-
Shuttlesworth v. CitySearch
-
of the public property or the local police commissioner ( cf. Kunz v. NewSearch
-
statute ( Cantwell v. ConnecticutSearch
-
lest the power to control excesses of conduct be used to suppress the constitutional right itself. See Stromberg v. CaliforniaSearch
-
which some of our States are inflicting on our citizens. What we do today disregards the admonition in De Jonge v. OregonSearch
-
From Feldman v. UnitedSearch
-
De Jonge v. OregonSearch
-
Feiner v. NewSearch
-
U. S. 87 . The same is true of other measures which inhibit First Amendment rights. See, e.g., NAACP v. AlabamaSearch
-
Bates v. CitySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Adderly v. FloridaSearch
-
and Cox v. LouisianaSearch
-
Hamm v. CitySearch
-
of Edwards v. SouthSearch
-
Garner v. LouisianaSearch
-
and Thompson v. CitySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial