Document: 468 U.S. 288 104 S.Ct. 3065 82 L.Ed.2d 221 William P. CLARK, Secretary of the Interior, et al., Petitionersv.COMMUNITY FOR CREATIVE NON-VIOLENCE al. No. 82-1998. Supreme Court United States Argued March 21, 1984. Decided June 29, Syllabus In 1982, National Park Service issued a permit to respondent Community for Creative Non-Violence (CCNV) conduct demonstration in Lafayette and Mall, which are Parks heart Washington, D.C. The purpose was call attention plight homeless, authorized erection two symbolic tent cities. However, Service, relying on its regulations particularly one that permits "camping" (defined as including sleeping activities) only designated campgrounds, no campgrounds having ever been or Mall—denied CCNV's request demonstrators be permitted sleep tents. CCNV individual respondents then filed an action Federal District Court, alleging, inter alia, application prevent tents violated First Amendment. granted summary judgment but Appeals reversed. Held: challenged does not violate Pp. 293-299. (a) Assuming overnight connection with is expressive protected some extent by Amendment, regulation forbidding meets requirements reasonable time, place, manner restriction expression, whether oral, written, symbolized conduct. neutral regard message presented, leaves open ample alternative methods communicating intended concerning homeless. Moreover, narrowly focuses Government's substantial interest maintaining parks Capital attractive intact condition, readily available millions people who wish see enjoy them their presence. To camping would totally inimical these purposes. validity need judged solely reference at hand, none provisions unrelated ends it designed serve. 293-298. (b) Similarly, also sustainable meeting standards valid Aside from impact speech, rule against public beyond constitutional power Government enforce. And noted above, there interest, suppression conserving park property served proscription sleeping. 298-299. 227 U.S.App.D.C. 19, 703 F.2d 586 (1983), Paul M. Bator, Cambridge, Mass., petitioners. Burt Neuborne, New York City, respondents. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 issue this case prohibiting certain violates Amendment when applied prohibit Mall We hold reverse contrary Appeals. 2 * Interior Department, through charged responsibility management maintenance promulgate rules use accordance purposes they were established. 16 U.S.C. §§ 1, 1a-1, 3.1 network includes Memorial-core parks, set D.C., unique resources holds trust American people. roughly 7-acre square located across Pennsylvania Avenue White House. Although originally part House grounds, President Jefferson aside residents visitors. It "garden . formal landscaping flowers trees, fountains, walks benches." Department President's Park, Resource Management 4.3 (1981). stretch land running westward Capitol Lincoln Memorial miles away. Washington Monument, series reflecting pools, lawns, other greenery. bordered by, Smithsonian Institution Gallery Art. Both included Major Pierre L'Enfant's original plan Capital. visited vast numbers visitors around country, well large metropolitan area. 3 Under involved case, purpose. 36 CFR § 50.27(a) (1983). No such have Mall. Camping defined 4 "the living accommodation activities, making preparations (including laying down bedding sleeping), storing personal belongings, any fire, using structure doing digging earth breaking carrying cooking activities." Ibid. 5 These provides, 6 "constitute reasonably appears, light all circumstances, participants, conducting fact area regardless intent participants nature activities may engaging." 7 Demonstrations airing views grievances most permits. 50.19 Temporary structures erected used camping. 50.19(e)(8) (1983).2 8 renewable wintertime demonstrating cities: 20 accommodate 50 40 capacity up 100. however, above regulations, specifically denied 9 several individuals no-camping proposed demonstration, which, claimed, covered regulation. submitted unconstitutionally vague, had discriminatorily applied, could without violating favor Service. Appeals, sitting en banc, v. Watt, 11 judges produced opinions. Six believed so infringe demonstrators' right free expression. five disagreed sustained demonstration.3 petition certiorari, 461 1016, 545, 78 721 now reverse.4 II 10 differ view Amendment.5 assume present purposes, do decide, cf. O'Brien, 391 367, 376, 88 1673, 1678, 672 (1968), assumption begins inquiry. Expression, oral written conduct, subject restrictions. often restrictions kind provided justified content regulated tailored serve significant governmental leave channels communication information. City Council Los Angeles Taxpayers Vincent, 466 789, 2118, 80 772 (1984); Grace, 171, 103 1702, 75 736 (1983); Perry Education Assn. Local Educators' Assn., 460 37, 45-46, 948, 954-955, 74 794 Heffron International Society Krishna Consciousness, Inc., 452 640, 647-648, 101 2559, 2563-2564, 69 298 (1981); Virginia Pharmacy Board Citizens Consumer Council, 425 748, 771, 96 1817, 1830, 48 346 (1976); Consolidated Edison Co. Public Comm'n N.Y., 447 530, 535, 100 2326, 2332, 65 319 (1980). true communicative that, context, understood viewer communicative. Spence 418 405, 94 2727, 41 842 (1974); Tinker Des Moines School District, 393 503, 89 733, 21 731 (1969). Symbolic expression forbidden if itself constitutionally regulated, drawn further speech. supra. 12 Petitioners submit, did defensible either agree assessment. required compliance (1913), prohibits lands, is, lands accommodations, sleeping, fires, digging, cooking. provisions, ban clearly limitations carried out. That like themselves, make less limitation demonstrating, normally direct effect limiting nevertheless valid. supra; Kovacs Cooper, 336 77, 448, 93 L.Ed. 513 (1949). Neither arguendo, rather than render prohibition contrary, neither attempts generally nor everywhere parks. has established areas forbids elsewhere, Considered such, we very little trouble concluding here. 13 requirement content-neutral satisfied. courts below accepted view, disputed here camping, specifically, being because disagreement presented.6 faulted, be, ground homeless communicated ways. otherwise left intact, city, signs, presence those willing take turns day-and-night vigil. Respondents suggest was, barrier delivering media, means, 14 apparent us our camping—using accommodations—would frequented country observed unfortunate consequences refuse confine areas. 15 urged respondents, city intend cook, dig, engage aspects incremental benefit justify activity said enhance poor cannot agree. first seriously doubt requires involving 24-hour vigil 150 Furthermore, although assumed banned element, evident major value facilitative. Without sleep, difficult get participate all. This much respondents: "Without incentive space hot meal, come site." App. 14. ban, enforced, thus effectively limit nature, extent, duration ease pressure Beyond this, cases hand. U.S., 652-653, S.Ct., 2566-2567. Absent groups demand permission deliver asserted Park. Some surely credible claim CCNV, denial still others problems With prohibition, before us, least around-the-clock demonstrations lasting days end will materialize, limited size duration, materially served. Perhaps more clumsily achieved preventing vigils entirely core But Service's decision nonsleeping not, impugn valuable, perhaps imperfect, protection If legitimate ensuring adequately protected, think has, exposed harm it, safe invalidation under As "responds precisely substantive legitimately concern [Government]." 810, 2132. 17 difficulty, therefore, understanding why overnight, withstands scrutiny. Surely unconstitutional face. None appears Nor demonstrate central Government. Damage partial inaccessibility members can easily result nondemonstrators. must tolerate it. All resort abide use, just observe traffic laws, sanitation laws preserve peace.7 reaffirmation acceptable. 18 Contrary conclusion foregoing analysis demonstrates four-factor standard validating last little, any, different restrictions.8 contends speech reasons discussed property, plainly implementation, measures wear tear properties. 19 unmoved Appeals' unnecessary, hence invalid, speech-restrictive alternatives satisfied preserving lands. There gainsaying avoid measure actual threatened damage suggestions minimize possible injury reducing size, frequency curtail total allowable engage, otherwise, represent over how require acceptable level preservation attained. believe, O'Brien decisions assign judiciary authority replace manager Nation's endow competence judge wise conservation attained.9 Accordingly, Reversed. 22 Chief BURGER, concurring. 23 I concur fully Court's opinion. 24 find conceive what include pitching building fire. Whether follows irrelevant. frailties, English language, centuries, hardly plainer informing prohibited. 25 actions claimed entitled protections simply speech; rather, constitute Black, never tolerant limits emphatically pointed out his separate Cox Louisiana, 379 536, 578, 85 453, 468, 471 (1965): 26 "The Fourteenth Amendments, think, away government, state federal, restrict freedom press, assembly where Picketing, though utilized communicate ideas, therefore Amendment." (Emphasis original; citations omitted.) 27 Respondents' attempt form "picketing"; interferes rights created. people, trespassed even "statement" make. Tents, sleepers, real feigned, interfere Of course, Constitution guarantees "statements," countless places sought 28 trivializes seek shield tells something about many wait "day court" time pre-empted frivolous proceedings delay causes litigants legitimate, nonfrivolous claims. alone engaged Judge, banc court Judges, Justices 29 MARSHALL, whom BRENNAN joins, dissenting. 30 disposition marked related failings. First, majority unwilling unable claims advanced impression given majority, supplicants seeking wheedle undeserved They citizens raising issues profound importance properly turned vindication rights. Second, misapplies test ascertaining restraint qualifies determining constitutes regulation, fails alleged interests degree scrutiny ensure remains unnecessary limitations. 31 proper starting point recognition highly outside, winter protesting homelessness—is assumes, deciding, respondents' protection. Ante, 293. problem thereby avoids examining closely reality planned majority's approach denatures makes too easy identification sufficient warrant abridgment. A realistic appraisal competing stake closer look context displayed. 32 late autumn round-the-clock Part persons outside amenities.1 begin date full ominous meaning person: day winter. similarly purposeful choosing sites. portrays sites—the peculiar fashion. According Court: 33 "Lafayette 'garden benches.' bordered, capital. ad area." 290. 34 Missing description inkling sites rousing political history. interesting learn, suppose, both Far pertinent, constitute, words, "a fitting powerful forum protest." Brief 11.2 35 primary3 integral "to re-enact homelessness," 2, impress upon consciousness, dramatic way possible, homelessness widespread problem, ignored, confronts victims life-threatening deprivations.4 men explained: "Sleeping me, show conditions actually across." Id., 3. long line cases, afforded See, e.g., Dis., (1969) (black armband worn students school protest policy Vietnam war); Brown 383 131, 86 719, 637 (1966) (sit-in Negro "whites only" library segregation); Stromberg California, 283 359, 51 532, 1117 (1931) (flying red flag gesture support communism). surrounding qualifications. previously acknowledged act denominated "speech" guidance should "read" determination. leading (1974), held displaying peace symbol attached looked speaker—whether "intent convey particularized message"—and second perception audience—whether likelihood great viewed it." 410-411, 2730-2731. Here outdoors near vicinity magisterial residence States. addition accentuating character choice location mode communication, underline giving satirical names. name "Congressional Village," "Reaganville II." 13. 37 circumstances significance Certainly news media activity; newspapers magazines Nation reported previous sleep-in display.5 Ordinary citizens, too, likely understand stems remarkably apt fit between social highlight. By protest, "can express bodies poignancy plight. physically neglect suffer articulateness Dickens match." 34, 586, 601 (1983) (Edwards, J. concurring). 38 go daily regimen part, represents physical necessity vehicle characteristics devoid novel communication. Sitting standing commonplace necessary facilitate usually nothing statement. observer construe Negroes stand sit Louisiana 1965 powerfully expressive; particular acts became "monuments protest" segregation. supra, 139, 722. 39 forseeable difficulty administration counsels recognizing predicament envisions termed imposter problem": distinguishing bona fide protesters imposters whose requests grounds mask ulterior designs—the simple desire, example, expense hotel lodgings. maintains distinctions made inquiring into sincerity inquiry pose dangers values necessarily content-sensitive. argument unpersuasive. variety already government agencies delicate task claimants asserting Wisconsin Yoder, 406 205, 215-216, 92 1526, 1533-1534, (1972) (exception religious group compulsory education statute group's adherence deep conviction subjective secular values); Welsh States, 398 333, 343-344, 90 1792, 1798-1799, 308 (1970) (eligibility exemption military service conscientious objector status sincere beliefs). incorrect imply display import altogether new disturbing jurisprudence. administrative vague apprehension. permitting created envisions, emerge clear factual basis establish advocates. final granting contextual rely fatally flawed overinclusiveness. overinclusive accords wide expressive, obviously prohibition. notes, "[a] ctions assassination figures bombing buildings fairly characterized perceived public." 24, n. 18. determination analysis. end. balanced countervailing interests. balancing doom protect antisocial destruction interference compelling outweigh nonetheless enunciated majority: "[R] estrictions information." 293 (citations omitted).6 conclude, fail satisfy standard. 42 denying sleep-speech "maintaining capital presence." 296. indeed significant. explains substantially interest. 43 attempted explanation curious statement doubts perceive "serious doubts" regarding matter provides uncertainty. founded, relate posed compelled staging continuous vigil; banning demonstration. 44 What suggesting permitted, supplements activities. Put arithmetical terms, contend X grace compulsion, + order restrain activity. notion, misguided conception every instance oft-stated secure widest dissemination information diverse antagonistic sources," Associated Press 326 20, 1416, 1424, 2013 (1945), assure unfettered interchange ideas bringing changes desired people." Roth 354 476, 484, 77 1304, 1308, 1498 (1957). See Buckley Valeo, 424 49, 612, 649, 46 659 Times Sullivan, 376 254, 266, 84 710, 718, 686 (1964); Whitney 274 357, 375-378, 47 641, 648-649, 71 1095 (1927) (Brandeis, J., stringency diminished seeks supplemental allow. abridgment reason prevented exercising safeguarded Bill Rights. 45 comprised suggestion contains element "its [respondents'] facilitative." While observation provide hint weight claims7, utterly irrelevant advances third based relieves burden because, flat process issuing "would Service." 297. increase probability "some [that] served," ante, 297, properties." 299. flaw contentions supported showing evinces real, opposed merely speculative, problem. offer evidence indicating absence absolute ordinarily confronts. mere apprehension difficulties enough overcome 182, 1709-1710, Dist., 508, 737. avoiding truly "substantial," expect agency administering allude Here, messages among underlying regulations.8 mentioned rejection request.9 erroneous revealed discourage "around-the-clock days" regulation's cites cause property. strikingly underinclusive. acknowledges "narrowly tailored." tailoring virtually forsaken inasmuch offers justification applying yet allow activities—such feigned sleeping—that burdensome. 49 short, prerogatives bureaucracy years shown implacable hostility toward citizens' exercise rights.10 III impels me additional observations. restrictions,11 dramatically lowered once determined content-neutral. creation two-tiered cases: while turn subjected strict judicial review,12 aimed matters receive minimal prong led diminution creates content-based distinction, seemingly overlooked capable unnecessarily restricting activity.13 sure, general essential tool helps put operation well-established principle "government grant finds acceptable, deny wishing favored controversial views." Police Chicago Mosley, 408 92, 95-96, 2286, 2289-2290, 212 (1972). transformed floor equal liberty ceiling restricts equality more.14 consistent imposition silence fulfill dictates handed content-neutrality. offends "profound national commitment debate uninhibited, robust, wide-open." 270, 720.15 reveals mistaken motives behavior officials create administer regulations. salutary skepticism Governmental decisionmaking suddenly dissipates determines content-based. evidently assumes balance struck deserving deference appear tainted discrimination. recognize strong incentives overregulate censor views. accommodate—on and, other, activity—the former far greater latter.16 52 dynamics lead disproportionate sensitivity regulatory discerned background case. revised consistently, facts record raise possibility impetus behind revision derived concerns facilities, "political," concerns. restrictive stemmed favoring same parties response announcement considering changing tighten regulations.17 observations integrity Rather, my intention illustrate concretely driven forums detriment rights, facial viewpoint-neutrality unpopular modes impelled 53 For reasons, respectfully dissent. admonished promote regulate means conform fundamental conserve scenery natural historic objects wild life therein unimpaired enjoyment future generations." Stat. amended, 1. Section 50.19(e)(8), temporary structures: "In special events, symbolizing logistical needs aid lost children provision shelter electrical sensitive equipment displays. above-listed per curiam preceding opinions described lineup follows: "Circuit Judge Mikva files opinion, Circuit Wald concurs, reversing. Robinson Wright file joining concurring Mikva's caveat. Edwards partially Ginsburg judgment. Wilkey dissenting Judges Tamm, MacKinnon, Bork Scalia concur. MacKinnon concur." U.S.App.D.C., 19-20, F.2d, 586-587. threshold matter, address contention fall within definition found contention, nine expressly rejected 591 (opinion Mikva, J.); id., 42, 609 Wilkey, J.). likewise merit. doubted expressing falls reject plurality below, advancement plausible contention" expressive. 26, 16, 593, 16. common place impingements interests, obligation person desiring assertedly applies. presumptively vital decline deviate relief bears he remand resolution improperly claim. 91, 50. questions uniformity enforcement claiming slept consistently enforced fair non-discriminatory manner. Pet. Cert. 106a-108a. Only addressed 43-44, 610-611 joined Bork, Scalia, JJ.). Our review leads genuine material isolated instances undiscovered violations When non-expressive situs Thus, choose enforce relating grazing animals, 50.13 flying model planes, 50.16; gambling, 50.17; hunting fishing, 50.18; setting off fireworks, 50.25(g); urination, 50.26(b). Reasonable directly odd insist higher regulable incidental sufficiently serves escape condemnation, untenable invalidate insufficient intrusion inadequate nexus note recently, dealing framed crucial cases. 804-805, 808-810, 2128-2129, 2130-2132, (1984). Edwards' "[t]o arguably suggests lack sense." 33, 600. clearer him "what exhausting expenditure resources." 601. similar after ruled extend 216 394, 670 1213 (1982) (CCNV I). Those consisted promulgated I. Fed.Reg. 24299 (1982). At argument, informed "that average three going on" Mall-Lafayette Tr. Oral Arg. 3-4. accurately describe "as analogue 'Speaker's Corner' Hyde Park." 25. Another enable weather rigors encourage stated permit: "If question answered [in year's demonstration]. hard tried [homeless persons] Reaganville [the respondents], come, until permitted." Estimates number range million. Coalition Homeless Amicus Curiae Though numerically significant, politically powerless financial obtain access effective persuasion. vote since mailing proof State disqualifies eligible citizen registering vote. 5. detrimental effects manifold psychic trauma, circulatory difficulties, infections heal, lice infestations, hypothermia. 14-15. extreme, exposure elements death; 1983 Christmas weekend perished cold. N.Y. Times, Dec. 27, 1983, p. A1., col. articles appended Declaration Mary Ellen Hombs, Record, Vol. difference distinguishes applicable articulated (1968). 298-299, 8. facilitative takes independent considerations. myself agreement non-communicative aspect site close, functional relationship commonly comprehended 'free speech.' " 40, 607 "[S]leeping them, allows demonstrator sustain her stopping short officially-granted permission." Ginsburg, linkage "suffices effort responsibility." 24301 16-17. suggested invalidated nonverbal trench ban. 15, 23. victim own generosity. However characterization unstinting provider opportunities thoroughly discredited grace. Women Strike Peace Morton, 153 198, 472 1273 (1972); Quaker Action Group 170 124, 516 717 (1975); Abney, 175 247, 534 984 (1976). (1969); (1966). Landmark Communications, Inc. Virginia, 435 829, 98 1535, 56 (1978). noted, facially situation arises vests standardless discretion empowered dispense forums. Lovell Griffin, 303 444, 58 666, 949 (1938); Hague CIO, 307 496, 59 954, 83 1423 (1939); Shuttlesworth Birmingham, 394 147, 935, 162 Redish, Content Distinction Analysis, Stan.L.Rev. 113 random force points view. inexpensive heavily relatively speakers typically espouse. 812-813, 30, 2133, 30. sort latent inequality buy conventional disquieting feature lends credence charge conjunction disparities wealth sources power, tends systematically discriminate efforts disadvantaged ideas. past, taken considerations account adjudicating financially deprived. Martin Struthers, 141, 146, 63 862, 865, 87 1313 (1943) (striking door-to-door distribution circulars "essential poorly financed people"); Marsh Alabama, 501, 66 276, 265 (1946) (State impose criminal sanction distributing literature sidewalk town owned private corporation). Such solicitude noticeably absent continuing trend escaped commentators. Dorsen & Gora, Free Speech, Property, Burger Old Values, Balances, 1982 S.Ct.Rev. 195; Van Alstyne, Recrudescence Property Rights Foremost Principle Civil Liberties: Decade Law Contemp.Prob. (summer 1980). critique 134-139. Goldberger, Judicial Scrutiny Forum Cases: Misplaced Trust Judgment Officials, Buffalo L.Rev. 175, 208 Exhibit 1kk,

Category: 2