Document: 408 U.S. 92 S.Ct. 2286 33 L.Ed.2d 212 POLICE DEPARTMENT OF the CITY CHICAGO et al., Petitioners,v.Earl D. MOSLEY. No. 70—87. Argued Jan. 19, 1972. Decided June 26, Syllabus City ordinance prohibiting all picketing within 150 feet of a school, except peaceful any school involved in labor dispute, found by Court Appeals to be unconstitutional because overbroad, held violative Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment since it makes an impermissible distinction between and other picketing. Pp. 94—102. 432 F.2d 1256, affirmed. Harvey J. Barnett, Chicago, Ill., for respondent Earl Mosley. Richard L. Curry, petitioners Police Department Chicago others. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 1 At issue this case is constitutionality following ordinance: 2 'A person commits disorderly conduct when he knowingly: 3 '(i) Pickets or demonstrates on public way primary secondary building while session one-half hour before after has been concluded, provided, that subsection does not prohibit dispute. . .' Municipal Code, c. 193 1(i). 4 The suit was brought Mosley, federal postal employee, who seven months prior enactment had frequently picketed Jones Commercial High School Chicago. During hours usually himself, Mosley would walk sidewalk adjoining carrying sign read: 'Jones practices black discrimination. quota.' His lonely crusade always peaceful, orderly, quiet, conceded so city 5 On March 1968, Chapter 193—1(i) passed, become effective April 5. Seeing newspaper announcement new ordinance, contacted find out how affect him; told that, if his continued, arrested. 4, day became effective, ended next school.1 Thereafter, action United States District Northern Illinois, seeking declaratory injunctive relief, pursuant 28 U.S.C. s 2201 42 § 1983. He alleged violation constitutional rights (1) statute punished activity protected First Amendment; (2) exempting only from its general prohibition against picketing, denied him 'equal protection law Amendments ..' 6 After hearing, granted directed verdict dismissing complaint. Seventh Circuit reversed, holding prohibited even overbroad therefore 'patently face.' 462 1259 (1970). We certiorari, 404 821, 42, 30 48 (1971), consider along with Grayned v. Rockford, 104, 2294, 222, which almost identical upheld Illinois Supreme Court, 46 Ill.2d 492, 496, 263 N.E.2d 866, 868 affirm judgment Circuit, although we decide ground reached court. hold becuase 7 * exempts pikceting school.2 question here whether selective exclusion place permitted. Our answer 'No.' 8 Because treats some differently others, analyze terms Amendment. Of course, equal claim closely intertwined interests;3 affects expressive conduct; moreover, classifications formulated subject As cases, however, crucial there appropriate governmental interest suitably furthered differential treatment. See Reed Reed, 71, 75—77, 251, 253—254, 225 (1971); Weber Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 406 164, 1400, 31 768 (1972); Dunn Blumstein, 405 330, 335, 995, 999, 274 (1972). 9 central problem Chicago's describes permissible matter. Peaceful school's labor-management dispute permitted, but prohibited. operative message picket sign. But, above else, means government no power restrict expression message, ideas, matter, content. Cohen California, 403 15, 24, 91 1780, 1787, 29 284 Street New York, 394 576, 89 1354, 22 572 (1969); York Times Co. Sullivan, 376 254, 269—270, 84 710, 720—721, 11 686 (1964), cases cited; NAACP Button, 371 415, 445, 83 328, 344, (1963); Wood Georgia, 370 375, 388—389, 82 1364, 1371—1372, 569 (1962); Terminiello 337 1, 69 894, 895, 93 L.Ed. 1131 (1949); De Jonge Oregon, 299 353, 365, 57 255, 260, 81 278 (1937). To permit continued our politics culture, assure self-fulfillment each individual, people are guaranteed right express thought, free consorship. essence forbidden consorship content control. Any restriction completely undercut 'profound national commitment principle debate issues should uninhibited, robust, wise-open.' supra, U.S., at 270, S.Ct., 721. 10 Necessarily, then, under Clause, mention itself, may grant use forum whose views finds acceptable, deny those wishing less favored more controversial views. And select worth discussing debating fcilities. There 'equality status field ideas,'4 must afford points view opportunity heard. Once opened up assembly speaking groups, others assembling basis what they intend say. Selective exclusions based alone, justified reference alone. Guided these principles, have condemned such discrimination among different users same medium expression. In Niemotko Maryland, 340 268, 71 325, 95 267 (1951), group Jehovah's Witnesses were park Bible talks, political religious groups allowed put analogous uses. Concluding city's 'dislike disagreement their views,' refusal violated '(t)he laws, exercise freedoms speech religion Amendments.' Id., 272, 328. followed Fowler Rhode Island, 345 67, 73 526, 97 828 (1953), where again refused permission services park, permitted do so. Similarly, potential as instruments selectively suppressing view, licensing schemes lodge broad discretion official speech-related activity, see, e.g., Shuttlesworth Birmingham, 147, 935, 162 Cox Louisiana, 379 536, 555—558, 85 453, 464—466, 13 471 (1965); Staub Baxley, 355 313, 321—325, 78 277, 281—284, 302 (1958), Saia 334 558, 560 562, 68 1148, 1149—1151, 1574 (1948).5 12 late Black, thought method expressing idea also state regulation, nevertheless recognized deficiencies laws like ordinance. This thrust concurring (1965): '(B)y specifically permitting publication union (but sorts picketing), Louisiana attempting pick choose willing discussed streets. It thus trying prescribe matters whom allows assemble streets discuss. seems me censorship most odious form, Amendments. appellnt racial discrimination, allowing voice opinions subjects, amounts, I think, invidious Amendment.' 581, 470. 14 accept Black's quoted Cf. NLRB Fruit Vegetable Packers, 377 58, 76, 1063, 1073, 129 (1964) (Black, J., concurring). II 15 say allowed. continually reasonable 'time, manner' regulations necessary further significant interests. Hampshire, 312 569, 575—576, 61 762, 765—766, 1049 (1941); Poulos 395, 398, 760, 1105 (1953); 554—555, 464—465, 464; Adderley Florida, 385 39, 48, 87 242, 246—247, 17 149 (1966). analysis, sufficient regulatory interests justifying distinctions pickets. Conflicting demands compel State make choices legitimate protect order. But justifications carefully scrutinized. plainly involves Amendment, Thornhill Alabama, 310 88, 60 736, 1093 (1940); Chauffeurs, Teamsters Helpers Local Union 795 Newell, 356 341, 779, 809 (1958); Garner 368 157, 185, 248, 263, 207 (1961) (Harlan, judgment); Edwards South Carolina, 372 229, 680, 697 546, 459; Amalgamated Food Employees Logan Valley Plaza, 391 308, 314—315, 88 1601, 1606—1607 (1968); id., 337, 1618 (White, dissenting); Gregory 111, 112, 946, 947, 134 155, 941, discriminations pickets tailored serve substantial interest. Williams Rhodes, 393 23, 5, 21 24 (1968). III 16 case, itself time, place, manner, regulation 'thus ship(s) neutrality circumstance into concern about content.'6 never spite this, urges improper censorship, rather device preventing disruption school. Cities certainly stopping disrupts 'The question, (Chicago's ordinance) advances objective manner consistent commands Clause.' 254. not. Although concern, determined during undue interference Therefore, maintain unless clearly disruptive than already permits. Tinker Des Moines Independent Community District, 503, 511, 733, 739, 731 Wirta Alameda-Contra Costa Transit Cal.2d 51, 64 Cal.Rptr. 430, 434 P.2d 982 (1967). If justification nonlabor both nonpeaceful. 'Peaceful' however term 'peaceful' defined, obviously permits latter prohibits former. Such unequal treatment exactly 272—273, 327—328. 18 reject argument because, class, prone produce violence picketing.7 Predictions imminent involve judgments appropriately made individualized basis, classifications, especially Freedom expression, intersection guarantee protection, rest soft foundation indeed could distinguish picketers wholesale categorical basis. '(I)n system, undifferentiated fear apprehension disturbance enough overcome freedom expression.' 508, 737. Some disorderly; true themes. No Mosley's solitary vigil. forum. 19 requires statutes affecting narrowly objectives. see generally 342—343, 1003.8 vindicate one preferred subject. Given tolerates excesses controlled violent 'can drawn statutes,' 1150, focusing abuses dealing evenhandedly regardless imposes far 'greater essential furtherance (a governmental) interest.' O'Brien, 367, 377, 1673, 1679, 20 672 Far being interest, stand.9 Judgment BLACKMUN REHNQUIST concur result. Chief BURGER, concurring. 23 join Court's reservation language used discussion could, read context, misleading. Numerous holdings attest fact literally mean 'are censorship.' statement qualifications, example Roth States, 354 476, 77 1304, 1498 (1957); Chaplinsky 315 568, 62 766, 86 1031 (1942). (1964). Occasionally, thereafter, across street, outside 150-foot zone. hearing below, testified 'when street away, you cannot hardly me. asked was, 'Where located?' They don't know. So, does, takes away certain amount effectiveness .. (W)hen am sort picture App. 24—25. By terms, 'the dispute.' undisputed exemption applies For discussions Amendment-Equal intersection, Kalven, Concept Public Forum: 1965 Sup.Ct.Rev. 29—30; T. Emerson, System Expression 303—304, 305—307 Blasi, Prior Restraints Demonstrations, Mich.L.Rev. 1482, 1492—1497 (1970); Van Alstyne, Political Speakers Universities: Constitutional Considerations, 111 U.Pa.L.Rev. 337—339 327, (1951). A. Meiklejohn, Freedom: Powers People 27 (1948). 510—511, 738—739, 47, 247, (1966); Carlson 106, 746, 748, 1104 (1967); Bynum Schiro, 219 F.Supp. 204 (E.D.La.1963), aff'd, 375 452, 412 (1964); East Meadow Concerts Assn. Board Education, N.Y.2d 129, 272 N.Y.S.2d 172 Matter Madole Barnes, 169, 282 225, 229 Crowthers, 456 1074 (CA4 1972); litigation Ellis Dixon, 349 458, 75 850, 99 1231 (1955). Flower 407 197, 1842, 32 653 29. 556 n. 14, 465, noted otherwise barring face assemblies parades, 'points reaches beyond mere traffic restrictions notes brief, pp. 28—30: 'Although civil movement understandably endeavored press service precedents developed relations litigation, important differences groups. Labor now token seldom leads peace, ever window smashing, arson. can carried without interrupting classes distracting students. know, student demonstrations schools—and parents 'concerned citizens'—are utterly different. Mass sit-ins, smashed windows order day. very purpose often bring educational process halt.' variety contexts said 'even though substantial, pursued broadly stifle fundamental personal liberties end achieved.' Shelton Tucker, 364 479, 488, 252, 231 (1960). standard, applied involved. E.g., Schneider State, 308 146, 152, 155 (1939); 364—365, 259—260, (1937); Cantwell Connecticut, 296, 307, 900, 904, 1213 438, 340, 559, 562—564, 479—481, 487 argued below necessitated pre-emption relations. recognizes National Relations Act subdivisions (and cities boards) definition 'employer' Act. 152. Nevertheless, still 'some merit.' argues 'since observance employees private employers lines repercussions sphere, well advised avoid quagmire ordinance.' Reply Brief 12. attenuated best small administrative convenience perhaps merely confession legislative laziness, justify blanket given applicable

Category: 2