Jump to content

Saia v. New York: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverting possible vandalism by 8.225.195.222 to version by Stevea20022002. False positive? Report it. Thanks, ClueBot NG. (101399) (Bot)
Line 37: Line 37:
==Decision of the Court==
==Decision of the Court==
Justice [[William O. Douglas|Douglas]] delivered the opinion of the Court.
Justice [[William O. Douglas|Douglas]] delivered the opinion of the Court.
He was not guilty haha he was sorry faggots dont trust wiki


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 17:50, 7 December 2010

Saia v. People of the State of New York
Argued March 30, 1948
Decided June 4, 1948
Full case nameSaia v. People of the State of New York
Citations334 U.S. 558 (more)
Holding
New York's law prohibiting the use of sound amplification devices without consent from the chief of police is an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Fred M. Vinson
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · Stanley F. Reed
Felix Frankfurter · William O. Douglas
Frank Murphy · Robert H. Jackson
Wiley B. Rutledge · Harold H. Burton
Case opinions
MajorityDouglas, joined by Black, Murphy, Vinson, Rutledge
DissentFrankfurter, joined by Reed, Burton
DissentJackson
Laws applied
Amendment I

Saia v. People of the State of New York, 334 U.S. 558 (1948), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an ordinance which prohibited the use of sound amplification devices except with permission of the Chief of Police was unconstitutional on its face because it established a previous restraint on the right of free speech in violation of the First Amendment.

Facts of the case

Saia, a minister of the Jehovah's Witnesses, obtained from the Chief of Police permission to use sound equipment, mounted atop his car, to amplify lectures on religious subjects. The lectures were given at a fixed place in a public park on designated Sundays. When this permit expired, he applied for another one but was refused on the ground that complaints had been made. Saia nevertheless used his equipment as planned on four occasions, but without a permit.

Prior history

Saia was tried in Police Court for violations of the ordinance. It was undisputed that he used his equipment to amplify speeches in the park and that they were on religious subjects. Some witnesses testified that they were annoyed by the sound, though not by the content of the addresses; others were not disturbed by either. The court upheld the ordinance against the contention that it violated appellant's rights of freedom of speech, assembly, and worship under the Federal Constitution. Fines and jail sentences were imposed. His convictions were affirmed without opinion by the County Court for Niagara County and by the New York Court of Appeals, 297 N.Y. 659, 76 N.E.2d 323.

Decision of the Court

Justice Douglas delivered the opinion of the Court. He was not guilty haha he was sorry faggots dont trust wiki

References