Document: 405 U.S. 518 92 S.Ct. 1103 31 L.Ed.2d 408 Millard GOODING, Warden, Appellant,v.Johnny C. WILSON. No. 70—26. Argued Dec. 8, 1971. Decided March 23, 1972. Syllabus Georgia statute providing that '(a)ny person who shall, without provocation, use to or of another, and in his presence . opprobrious words abusive language, tending cause a breach the peace shall be guilty misdemeanor,' which has not been narrowed by courts apply only 'fighting' 'which their very utterance tend incite an immediate peace,' Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 568, 572, 62 766, 769, 86 L.Ed. 1031, is on its face unconstitutionally vague overbroad under First Fourteenth Amendments. Pp. 520—528. 431 F.2d 855, affirmed. Courtney Wilder Stanton, Atlanta, Ga., for appellant. Elizabeth R. Rindskopf, appellee. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion Court. 1 Appellee was convicted Superior Court, Fulton County, Georgia, two counts using language violation Code Ann. § 26—6303, provides: 'Any misdemeanor.' appealed conviction Supreme Court ground, among others, violated Amendments because overbroad. The rejected contention sustained conviction. Wilson State, 223 Ga. 531, 156 S.E.2d 446 (1967). then sought federal haveas corpus relief District Northern Georgia. found that, appellee had failed exhaust available state remedies as other grounds he relied upon attacking conviction, 26—6303 facially unconstitutional ripe decision.1 303 F.Supp. 952 (1969). On merits question, disagreement with held face, broad set aside appellee's Appeals Fifth Circuit 855 (1970). We noted probable jurisdiction State's appeal, 403 930, 91 2244, 29 708 (1971). affirm. 2 Section punishes spoken words. It can therefore withstand attack facial constitutionality if, authoritatively construed courts, it susceptible application speech, although vulgar offensive, protected Amendments, Cohen California, 15, 18—22, 1780, 1784—1786, 284 (1971); Terminiello Chicago, 337 1, 4—5, 69 894, 895—896, 93 1131 (1949). Only supply requisite construction, since course 'we lack construe legislation.' United States Thirty-seven (37) Photographs, 402 363, 369, 1400, 1405, 28 822 matters used might have constitutionally prohibited narrowly precisely drawn statute. At least when statutes regulate proscribe speech 'no readily apparent construction suggests itself vehicle rehabilitating single prosecution,' Dombrowski Pfister, 380 479, 491, 85 1116, 1123, 14 22 (1965), transcendent value all society expression deemed justify allowing 'attacks overly no requirement making demonstrate own conduct could regulated narrow specificity,' id., at 486, S.Ct., 1121; see also Baggett Bullitt, 377 360, 366, 84 1316, 1319, 12 (1964); Coates City Cincinnati, 611, 616, 1686, 1689, 214 (1971), 619—620, 1691 (White, J., dissenting); Raines, 362 17, 21—22, 80 519, 522—523, 4 524 (1960); NAACP Button, 371 415, 433, 83 328, 338, 9 (1963). This necessary persons whose may well refrain from exercising rights fear criminal sanctions provided expression. 3 'Although neither vague, overbroad, nor otherwise invalid applied charged against particular defendant, permitted raise vagueness overbreadth others. And if law deficient one these respects, him either, until unless satisfactory limiting placed statute, effect, stricken down face. result justified continued existence unnarrowed form would suppress rights.' supra, U.S., (opinion White, J.) (citation omitted). constitutional guarantees freedom forbid punish within 'narrowly limited classes speech.' 571, 1031 (1942). Even such class, however, 'the line between unconditionally guaranteed legitimately regulated, suppressed, punished finely drawn,' Speiser Randall, 357 513, 525, 78 1332, 1342, 1460 (1958), '(i)n every case power must so exercised not, attaining permissible end, unduly infringe freedom,' Cantwell Connecticut, 310 296, 304, 60 900, 903, 1213 (1940). In words, carefully unprotected 'Because Amendment freedoms need breathing space survive, government area specificity.' ' 338. 5 Appellant does challenge principles but contends class words—'fighting' 'those inflict injury peace.' 769. Chaplinsky, we Chapter 378, 2, Public Laws provided: 'No address any derisive annoying word lawfully street public place, call offensive name ..' addressing another sidewalk 'You are God damned racketeer,' 'a Fascist whole Rochester Fascists agents Fascists.' challenged inhibiting indefinite. 'long before convicted,' sharply statutory 'offensive, word' words: 6 '(N)o were forbidden except direct tendency acts violence whom, individually, remark addressed. 7 'The test what men common intelligence understand likely average addressee fight. Derisive taken coming purview they this characteristic plainly excite peace. 8 construed, more than prohibit face-to-face .' N.H. 310, 313, 320—321, 18 A.2d 754, 758, 762 (1941). view authoritative held: 'We unable say scope thus contravenes right free define specific lying domain power, place 573, 770. Our decisions recognize expression, 20, 1785; Bachellar Maryland, 397 564, 567, 90 1312, 1314, 25 570 (1970); Street York, 394 576, 592, 89 1354, 1365, 572 reaffirm proposition today. 10 argues appellate proscription Hampshire 'A consideration (Georgia) cases construing elements offense makes clear thereby those matter knowledge ordinary circumstances will, person, presence, naturally provoke violent resentment. simply states previously denominated 'fighting words." Brief 6. Neither read decisions. contrary, expressly stated, 'Thus, brought Court's attention, meaningful attempt made limit properly terms.' F.Supp., 955. Judge member unanimous panel practitioners ascended bench.2 Their views necessarily persuasive us. Wright, Law Federal Courts 58, pp. 240—241 (2d ed. 1970). have, our examination cases, both cited others discovered research. That brings us conclusion, agreement below, application, 'have addressed.' dictionary definitions 'opprobrious' 'abusive' give them greater reach Webster's Third International Dictionary (1961) defined 'conveying intended convey disgrace,' including 'harsh insulting language.' utterances definitions, defines them. Lyons 94 Ga.App. 570, 95 478 (1956), awakening women scout leaders camp-out shouting, 'Boys, where going spend night.' 'Get G—- d—- bed rolls out let's how close come tents.' Again, Fish 124 416, 52 S.E. 737 (1905), jury question presented remark, swore lie.' Jackson 19, 20 (1913), addressed 'God damn you, why don't you get road?' Plainly, disgrace' language,' 11 'tending peace' underscore limited, appellant argues, 'naturally resentment.' supra; supra. Indeed, Appeals3 Elmore 15 461, 799 (1914), mere 'words description, indicating kind character penalized, even though who, account virtue obligations office, cannot actually there resent same .. 13 '. Suppose safe distance hearing whom spoke, locked prison cell opposite bank impassable torrent, hence respond immediately verbal insults physical retaliation, reasonably contended follow, violated? (T)hough, imposed able time assault beat still some future time, longer hampered inability, present conditions, official position.' Ga.App., 461—463, S.E., 799—800.4 Moreover, Samuels 103 66, 67, 118 231, 232 Appeals, applying adopted textbook common-law definition 'breach 16 term generic, includes violations order, decorum; signifies disturbing tranquility enjoyed citizens community. By 'peace,' connection, meant municipality community good order reigns members.' 17 merely speak hear them, sweeps too broadly. 1365. '(H)ow infinitely doubtful uncertain boundaries 'diversion Gregory 111, 119, 946, 950, 134 (1969) (Black, concurring) (emphasis supplied). Accordingly, agree Ashton Kentucky, 384 195, 1407, 469 (1966), Cox Louisiana, 379 536, 453, 471 compel conclusion standard responsibility specificity. 'to make 'calculated create disturbances leaves wide open responsibility.' 200, 1410. Louisiana struck included element congregating 'within intent peace, occasioned thereby.' As observed, '(a)s especially instant case, provision broader statute.' 956. 19 conclude '(t)he separation legitimate illegitimate calls sensitive tools supplied.' 1342. most recent decision rejecting stated 'conveys definite meaning forbidden, measured understanding practice.' 533, S.E.2d, 448. Because earlier likelihood response, juries determine guilt 'measured practice' 26 6303 Chaplinsky. Rather, effectively 'licenses each case.' Herndon Lowry, 301 242, 263, 57 732, 741, 81 1066 (1937). fault responsibility, easily improper application.' 955—956. Unlike 'so avoid difficulties.' Thirty-Seven 1405. Affirmed. 21 POWELL REHNQUIST, took part case. Chief BURGER, dissenting. 23 I fully join BLACKMUN's dissent bizarre reached odd, nothing less remarkable court find void traditional test—but way State few isolated decided long ago 1905 generally yesterday, do significant potential sweeping deter important speech. 24 appears stem assumption should regarded light clause, regard language. Thus, contains finds 'compelled' (1965). bar, Nor 'opprobrious language' more. prohibits (of) If bear meaning, considered context, rather dissected surgical precision semantic scalpel, little outside realm words' beyond protection describe subject regulation bears striking resemblance enacted many, many years decided. See early majority establish proposition, clearly indicates, aimed preventing type personal, face-to-face, retaliation self-help, euphemistically it—that recognized validly prohibited. facts now serving valid entirely proper purpose. There reason wipe books, want encourage victims assaults seek private redress. apparently acknowledges defendant Amendment, contend ambiguous did fair notice deny normal adjudication, ground hypothetical situation party 21, 522, (1960) (Brennan, J.). Instead, relies certain contained opinions nature conduct, invalidated 'it Amendments.' Such expansive statement technique substantial overbreach policy actual past commend it. recognizes, doctrine serves purpose, allow invalidate demonstrates applications posing deterring speech—not insubstantial imagined occasional go bounds. Writing related Black, last Term, evidenced adjudication observed: 27 'Procedures testing 'on face' enjoining action enforce obtain approval modified version, fundamentally odds function plan. duty judiciary declare laws final analysis derived resolving concrete disputes decision; governing dispute judges conflict Constitution. Marbury Madison, (1 Cranch) 137, (1803). But vital is, amount unlimited survey books pass judgment called (T)he task analyzing proposed pinpointing deficiencies, requiring correction deficiencies put into effect rarely ever appropriate judiciary. Younger Harris, 401 37, 52—53, 746, 669 These observations directed specifically practice issuing injunctions prosecutions, problem much same. Consistent restrained approach, majority, up areas concern far apparent—both coverage—than leading statute's sweep deterrent amply documented heavily example, involved leader black students basis participation peaceful demonstration protesting racial discrimination urging 'sit in' segregated lunch counters. Although held, alternative, prohibition 'with thereby' primary holding appellant's revealed record 545—551, 459—462. contrast today's opinion, mentions passing footnote, careful recital involved, care observe 'any evidence words.' 1031.' 551, 462. clear, therefore, involving political concerning burning issue great social concern, cogent applications. contrast, ancient today indicates remotely comparable Cox. 30 consider detail. Suffice (1966); (1963), arose factual situations objectives different terms danger relevance hand best strained remote.* mechanical and, suggest, insensitive BLACKMUN correctly points out, difficult imagine enact regulating tells regulated. regrettable consequence mislead believe fighting uttered legal sanctions. 32 BLACKMUN, THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, 33 seems strange, indeed, day man police officer, attempting restore access building, 'White son bitch, I'll kill you' choke death,' accompanying your hands me again, cut pieces,' yet prosecuted misdemeanor 'use This, pronounces 34 appealed, unanimously way. Surely adult read—and exclude appellee-defendant category—should expect conclusion. clear. They concise. my view, incapable being understood. Except perhaps 'big' 'opprobrious'—and point bigness-any schoolboy defendant's provocative officers covered 26—6303. Common sense permits demonstrated fact appellee, applies conceivably utter 35 reaches saying interpreted applicable follows, says entirety. Thus left meet Wilson's bullying tactic. result, achieved indeed strict will totally incomprehensible citizens. 36 unearthing 66-year-old decision, intermediate over 55 old, broadly permissive days, additional reference (a) 1956 478, which, first surely support (b) 231 (1961), relating, 37 developed rationale cases. condemned opportunity adjust modern theories overbreadth. 38 wonder, voided, just seeks proscribe. natural thing new reading reads. it, too, presumably legislature add means mean Criminal 26—2610 39 placing weight Smith practitioner Morgan practiced State. After all, bound self-imposed straitjacket approach. Smith's personal attitude said: 40 '(T)his reasons upholding expressed petitioner. strains concept proportion argued protected.' 952, 955 (N.D.Ga.1969). 41 joined comment when, here, agreed reasoned district court.' 859 (C.A.5 42 For me, (1942), deserves remain now. A members Stone Justices Reed, Douglas, Murphy, obviously thought law. feel despite protestations paying lip service footnote brief, p. 14, doubt about Chaplinsky.' means, produces, urgently needs re-examination. painted corner States, extricate themselves difficulty. 'Accordingly, deal alleged raised writ, unconstitutionality 26—6303.' 953. battery offenses arising incident, convictions affirmed Circuit. Tillman 406 930 giving rise prosecutions follows: group August 18, 1966, picketed building 12th Corps Headquarters Army located, carrying signs opposing war Viet Nam. When inductees arrived began block door enter. requested move door, refused so. attempted remove scuffle ensued. ample show committed named indictment. sufficient charged, authorized shown tended 535, 446, 449—450. 'Count indictment accused 'did provocation M. G. Redding following peace: you.' death." Count T. L. Raborn, pieces.'" Id., 534, 449. Sidney O. Smith, Jr., Gainesville, Judge. Lewis Newnan, panel, sat appointment Appeals. informed oral argument statewide jurisdiction, binding trial absence conflicting follow holdings Fidelity Union Trust Co. Field, 311 169, 61 176, 109 (1940); Bernhardt Polygraphic America, 350 198, 205, 76 273, 277, 100 199 (1956). dissents reliance 50 ago. (1905) 1967 holding. interpretations highest court. * assuming impermissibly satisfactorily explain To sure, notes cryptic hardly resolves matter. holds prohibited, agrees limited. assume prosecutors police, ignore sustaining explicit premise Note, Overbreadth Doctrine, Harv.L.Rev. 844, 892, 894 896, nn. 189, 190 Where defining available, excise more, less, reluctant strike relying old bolster virtually concedes plain offend Amendment.

Category: 2