From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Opelika

U.S.
May 3, 1943
319 U.S. 103 (1943)

Summary

In Jones v. Opelika, 319 U.S. 103, vacating 316 U.S. 584, and in Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, the Court held that imposition of the tax upon itinerants was improper.

Summary of this case from Niemotko v. Maryland

Opinion

CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA.

No. 280, October Term, 1941.

Reargued March 10, 11, 1943. Decided May 3, 1943.

Upon rehearing, 318 U.S. 796, the judgments heretofore entered in these cases, 316 U.S. 584, affirming the judgments of the state courts, are vacated, and the judgments of the state courts are reversed. P. 104. 242 Ala. 549, 7 So.2d 503, reversed. 202 Ark. 614, 151 S.W.2d 1000, reversed. 58 Ariz. 144, 118 P.2d 97, reversed.

Mr. Hayden C. Covington for petitioners.

No appearance for respondents in Nos. 280 and 314, and appellee in No. 966.

Briefs of amici curiae were filed by Mr. Osmond K. Fraenkel, on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union, in support of the petition for rehearing; and by Mr. Elisha Hanson, on behalf of the American Newspaper Publishers Association, and Messrs. Homer Cummings and Millward C. Taft, on behalf of the General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists, in support of the petition for rehearing and urging reversal.



The judgments in these cases were affirmed at the October Term, 1941. 316 U.S. 584. Because the issues in all three cases were of the same character as those brought before us in other cases by applications for certiorari at the present term, we ordered a reargument and heard these cases together with Murdock v. Pennsylvania, post, p. 105. For the reasons stated in the opinion of the Court in the Murdock case, and in the dissenting opinions filed in the present cases after the argument last term, the Court is of opinion that the judgment in each case should be reversed. The judgments of this Court heretofore entered in these cases are therefore vacated, and the judgments of the state courts are reversed.

So ordered.

For dissenting opinions, see post, pp. 117-140.


Summaries of

Jones v. Opelika

U.S.
May 3, 1943
319 U.S. 103 (1943)

In Jones v. Opelika, 319 U.S. 103, vacating 316 U.S. 584, and in Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, the Court held that imposition of the tax upon itinerants was improper.

Summary of this case from Niemotko v. Maryland

In Murdock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, supra, 319 U.S. at 113, 63 S.Ct. at 875, Mr. Justice Douglas pointed out that if a "license tax is fixed in amount and unrelated to the scope of the activities of petitioners or to their realized revenues," it may lead to an impermissible suppression of First Amendment liberties.

Summary of this case from Pent-R-Books, Inc. v. United States Postal Service
Case details for

Jones v. Opelika

Case Details

Full title:JONES v . OPELIKA

Court:U.S.

Date published: May 3, 1943

Citations

319 U.S. 103 (1943)
63 S. Ct. 890

Citing Cases

Inst. in Basic Youth Conflicts v. State Bd.

With four justices dissenting, the United States Supreme Court upheld the ordinances, stating at page 597 [86…

Marsh v. Alabama

For it is the State's contention that the mere fact that all the property interests in the town are held by a…