Thomas v US, CA 84-3552 Published at 696 F.Supp. Plaintiffs allege a pattern of arrests and seizures of property that exceed, in their view, the appropriate scope of enforcement of the regulations.
Plaintiffs thus raise a serious vagueness challenge to the regulations.
Regulations of the sort at issue here are criminal laws. All are entitled to be informed as to what the State commands or forbids. In order to conform to the due process component of the Fifth Amendment, a criminal provision must define the criminal offense with sufficient definiteness that ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited and in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. Vague time, place, and manner regulations cause citizens to steer wider of the unlawful zone than they would if the boundaries of the 9 forbidden areas were clearly marked. See United States Civil Serv.