18 Cited authorities

Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc.
512 U.S. 753 (1994) Cited 636 times
Holding that an injunction against anti-abortion protesters was not viewpoint discriminatory because "none of the restrictions imposed by the court were directed at the contents of petitioner's message."
Baggett v. Bullitt
377 U.S. 360 (1964) Cited 927 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding a loyalty oath statute facially unconstitutional because of a similar definition of "subversive person"
Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.
567 U.S. 239 (2012) Cited 207 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that regulation forbidding fleeting expletives and nudity in broadcasts was unconstitutionally vague as applied to multiple broadcast companies
Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network, Western N.Y
519 U.S. 357 (1997) Cited 280 times
Holding that an injunction provision that required abortion protestors to move away from abortion clinic patients who asked to be left alone did not violate the First Amendment
Greer v. Spock
424 U.S. 828 (1976) Cited 506 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that public’s ability to freely visit property owned or operated by the Government does not turn that property into a public forum for purposes of the First Amendment
Cox v. Louisiana
379 U.S. 559 (1965) Cited 659 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute criminalizing demonstrations "in or near" a courthouse was not unconstitutionally vague
People v. Nieves
2 N.Y.3d 310 (N.Y. 2004) Cited 414 times
In Nieves, the defendant contended that the orders of protection were unlawfully lengthy because, after the sentencing court entered them with fixed expiration dates based on the defendant's anticipated release date, DOCCS credited him with additional jail time, rendering the orders above the statutory maximum.
Cramp v. Bd. of Public Instruction
368 U.S. 278 (1961) Cited 321 times
Holding unconstitutionally vague that part of the oath deleted in chapter 83-214
United States v. Apel
571 U.S. 359 (2014) Cited 41 times 2 Legal Analyses
Describing the defendant's prior conviction under § 1382 as "trespass[ing] beyond the designated protest area" at Vandenberg
N.Y. ex Rel. Spitzer v. Operation Rescue Nat'l
273 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2001) Cited 42 times
Holding that a defendant physically obstructed in violation of FACE by slowing access to the clinic's parking lot by "dropping an item on the ground and then retrieving it in slow motion"

The People, Respondent,v.Mary Anne Grady Flores, Appellant.

18 Cited authorities

Holding that an injunction against anti-abortion protesters was not viewpoint discriminatory because "none of the restrictions imposed by the court were directed at the contents of petitioner's message."

Holding a loyalty oath statute facially unconstitutional because of a similar definition of "subversive person"

Holding that regulation forbidding fleeting expletives and nudity in broadcasts was unconstitutionally vague as applied to multiple broadcast companies

Holding that an injunction provision that required abortion protestors to move away from abortion clinic patients who asked to be left alone did not violate the First Amendment

Holding that public’s ability to freely visit property owned or operated by the Government does not turn that property into a public forum for purposes of the First Amendment

Holding that a statute criminalizing demonstrations "in or near" a courthouse was not unconstitutionally vague

Holding unconstitutionally vague that part of the oath deleted in chapter 83-214

Describing the defendant's prior conviction under § 1382 as "trespass[ing] beyond the designated protest area" at Vandenberg

Holding that a defendant physically obstructed in violation of FACE by slowing access to the clinic's parking lot by "dropping an item on the ground and then retrieving it in slow motion"