39 Cited authorities

Ward v. Rock Against Racism
491 U.S. 781 (1989) Cited 2,862 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that music is protected expression
Hill v. Colorado
530 U.S. 703 (2000) Cited 1,273 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding content neutral a ban on "picketing," "demonstrating," "protest, education, or counseling" even though it may require the government "to review the content of the statements made"
Snyder v. Phelps
562 U.S. 443 (2011) Cited 812 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Westboro Baptist Church's protest of military funerals with signs that display "Thank God for IEDs" and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers" is protected speech
Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union
521 U.S. 844 (1997) Cited 986 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding parts of § 223 unconstitutional under the First Amendment
Houston v. Hill
482 U.S. 451 (1987) Cited 1,340 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the First Amendment does not permit states to “provide the police with unfettered discretion to arrest individuals for words or conduct that annoy or offend them”
McCullen v. Coakley
573 U.S. 464 (2014) Cited 525 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding unconstitutional buffer zone restriction requiring plaintiffs to stand a substantial distance away from an abortion provider's driveway
Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence
468 U.S. 288 (1984) Cited 1,444 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a ban on sleeping overnight in a park was a permissible "limitation on the manner of demonstrating"
Boos v. Barry
485 U.S. 312 (1988) Cited 832 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding a law was content-based where it prohibited speech critical of a foreign government within 500 feet of that government’s embassy
Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad
420 U.S. 546 (1975) Cited 967 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that Hair, including the "group nudity and simulated sex" involved in the production, is protected speech
City of Ladue v. Gilleo
512 U.S. 43 (1994) Cited 503 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding unconstitutional a city's ban on all residential signs, because they are a "venerable means of communication that is both unique and important"

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

39 Cited authorities

Holding that music is protected expression

Holding content neutral a ban on "picketing," "demonstrating," "protest, education, or counseling" even though it may require the government "to review the content of the statements made"

Holding that the Westboro Baptist Church's protest of military funerals with signs that display "Thank God for IEDs" and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers" is protected speech

Holding parts of § 223 unconstitutional under the First Amendment

Holding that the First Amendment does not permit states to “provide the police with unfettered discretion to arrest individuals for words or conduct that annoy or offend them”

Holding unconstitutional buffer zone restriction requiring plaintiffs to stand a substantial distance away from an abortion provider's driveway

Holding that a ban on sleeping overnight in a park was a permissible "limitation on the manner of demonstrating"

Holding a law was content-based where it prohibited speech critical of a foreign government within 500 feet of that government’s embassy

Holding that Hair, including the "group nudity and simulated sex" involved in the production, is protected speech

Holding unconstitutional a city's ban on all residential signs, because they are a "venerable means of communication that is both unique and important"