Document: 402 U.S. 611 91 S.Ct. 1686 29 L.Ed.2d 214 Dennis COATES et al., Appellants,v.CITY OF CINCINNATI. No. 117. Argued Jan. 11, 1971. Decided June 1, Syllabus Cincinnati, Ohio, ordinance making it a criminal offense for 'three or more persons to assemble * on any of the sidewalks and there conduct themselves in manner annoying passing by *,' which has not been narrowed construction Ohio Supreme Court, held, violative its face due process standard vagueness constitutional right free assembly association. Pp. 1688—1689. 21 St.2d 66, 255 N.E.2d 247, reversed. Robert R. Lavercombe, appellants. A. David Nichols, appellee. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion Court. 1 A makes *.'1 The issue before us is whether this unconstitutional face. 2 appellants were convicted violating ordinance, convictions ultimately affirmed closely divided vote Court upholding validity ordinance. 247. An appeal from that judgment was brought here under 28 U.S.C. § 1257(2),2 we noted probable jurisdiction, 398 902, 90 1694, 26 60. record reviewing courts tells no than appellant Coates student involved demonstration other pickets labor dispute. For throughout litigation appellants' position violates First Fourteenth Amendments Constitution. Cf. Times Film Corp. v. Chicago, 365 43, 81 391, 5 403. 3 In rejecting claim affirming did give at variance with apparent plain import language. court simply stated: 4 'The prohibits, inter alia, 'conduct by.' word 'annoying' widely used well understood word; necessary guess meaning. 'Annoying' present participle transitive verb 'annoy' means trouble, vex, impede, incommode, provoke, harass irritate. 'We conclude, as United States Cameron Johnson, 390 611, 616, 88 1335, 20 182 statute presented, 'clearly precisely delineates reach words common understanding. It 'precise narrowly drawn regulatory (ordinance) evincing legislative certain specific be proscribed.'" St.2d, 69, N.E.2d, 249. 6 Beyond this, only put upon state unexplained conclusion 'the specifies dependent each complainant's sensitivity.' Ibid. But indicate whose sensitivity violation does depend—the judge jury, arresting officer, hypothetical reasonable man.3 7 We are thus relegated, best, itself. If three people meet together sidewalk street corner, they must so annoy police officer person who should happen pass by. our unconstitutionally vague because subjects exercise an unasertainable standard, broad authorizes punishment constitutionally protected conduct. 8 Conduct annoys some others. Thus, vague, sense requires conform his imprecise but comprehensible normative rather specified all. As result, 'men intelligence necessarily meaning.' Connally General Construction Co., 269 385, 46 126, 127, 70 L.Ed. 322. 9 said enough encompass many types clearly within city's power prohibit. And so, indeed, is. city prevent blocking sidewalks, obstructing traffic, littering streets, committing assaults, engaging countless forms antisocial can do through enactment enforcement ordinances directed specificity toward prohibited. Gregory 394 111, 118, 124—125, 89 946, 950, 953—954, 22 134 (Black, J., concurring). cannot may entirely depend policeman annoyed.4 10 vice lies alone vagueness. also Our decisions establish mere public intolerance animosity basis abridgment these freedoms. See Street New York, 576, 592, 1354, 1365, 572; Cox Louisiana, 379 536, 551—553, 85 453, 462—463, 13 471; Edwards South Carolina, 372 229, 238, 83 680, 685, 697; Terminiello 337 69 894, 93 1131; Cantwell Connecticut, 310 296, 311, 60 900, 84 1213; Schneider State, 308 147, 161, 146, 150—151, 155. permit State make people. rule, gather places social political purposes would continually subject summary suspension good-faith prohibition against conduct.5 such prohibition, addition, contains obvious invitation discriminatory those association their ideas, lifestyle, physical appearance resented majority fellow citizens.6 11 crime out what Constitution crime. aimed directly activity need lament have details found annoying. sets warns transgression. could serve validate charged suspending unconditionally speech. 12 BLACK. 14 First. I agree case properly Ohio. 15 Second. This long held laws understanding know forbidden Lanzetta Jersey, 306 451, 59 618, 888 (1939), L. Cohen Grocery 81, 41 298, 65 516 (1921). Likewise, broadly forbid activities Federal Constitution, as, instance, discussion matters, void Thornhill Alabama, 88, 736, 1093 (1940). On hand, plainly restrict either merely applied instances. my Brother WHITE states (with substantially agree), one numerous cases where law prohibits both safeguards punish. Amendment forbids abridge freedom speech, invalidate if punish even speech persons. contrast, however, prohibit gathering mouths alleys passersby throwing rocks all connected matter little difficulty determine when action inappropriate. aggravated case, fails show defendants had engaged view, showing facts surrounding conviction essential adjudicate important issues case. therefore vacate remand instructions trial parties opportunity supplement actually punished kind 16 WHITE, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE BLACKMUN join, dissenting. 17 part, Cincinnati assembling others 'conduct(ing) *.' Code Ordinances 901—L6. Any man average comprehension kinds conduct, assault passage street, will covered 'annoying conduct' frivolous say foreseeable law. 18 possible whole range acts, defined imprecision, general charge based proscription statute, defense behavior. Such circumstances, ruling challenge obviously knowledge defendant charged. 19 Williams States, 341 97, 71 95 774 (1951), federal statutes extracting confessions force thus, color law, depriving prisoner rights, privileges, immunities secured contrary 242. urged standard—rights, Constitution—was impermissibly and, particularly, often illegal-confession expected he Court's response that, while application less methods coercion might raise doubts about adequacy guilt, it, 'plain pikestaff allowed evidence whatever school thought concerning scope meaning Due Process Clause.' Id., 101, S.Ct., 579. facial rejected. So too National Dairy Prod. Corp., 29, 594, 561 (1963), considered forbidding sales goods 'unreasonably' low prices injure eliminate competitor, 13a, gave seller adequate notice below cost illegal. facially although difficult tell fell said: 'In determining sufficiency necessity examined light charged.' 33, 598. Harriss, 347 612, 74 808, 98 989 (1954). approach consistent host holding 'one heard attack ground impliedly taken applying situations unconstitutional.' Raines, 362 17, 21, 80 519, 522, 524 (1960), cited. cases, including Dairy, recognize different purports regulate proscribe rights press Amendment. Robel, 389 258, 419, 508 (1967); Keyishian Board Regents, 385 589, 87 675, 629 Kunz 340 290, 312, 280 (1951). Although neither overbroad, nor otherwise invalid particular defendant, permitted overbreadth deficient respects, him either, until unless satisfactory limiting placed statute. Dombrowski Pfister, 380 479, 491—492, 1116, 1123—1124, (1965). effect, stricken down result deemed justified since continued existence unnarrowed form tend suppress rights. supra, 36, 599. Even accepting doctrine respect reaching purport bar such. 'conduct(ing)' assembled demonstrating picketing, recognized picketing solely communicative endeavor aspects entitled though incidental impact 559, 476, 487 (1965), valid parading near courthouse. regulation pure reached 'subject (it was) intertwined expression association.' 563, 480. then went consider record. 23 us, deal ordinary reaches illegally infirm information defendants, applied. That confer wide discretion circumstances irrelevant dealing core. 24 affirm 'It shall unlawful assemble, except meeting citizens, corners, vacant lots, alleys, by, occupants adjacent buildings. Whoever provisions section fined exceeding fifty dollars ($50.00), imprisoned (1) thirty (30) days both.' Section 901—L6, City (1956). 'Final judgments decrees rendered highest decision had, reviewed follows: '(2) By appeal, question being repugnant treaties favor validity.' Chaplinsky Hampshire, 315 568, 62 766, 86 1031, upheld 'offensive, derisive annoying' words. construed 'as direct tendency cause acts violence whom, individually, remark addressed.' 'offensive' terms addressee thinks. test men understand likely fight. English language number expressions consent 'fighting words' without disarming smile. words, know, threatening, profane obscene revilings. Derisive coming purview heretofore interpreted characteristic tending excite breach peace.' 'unable limited contravenes expression.' U.S., 573, 770. striking very similar Cleveland, invalid, Appeals Cuyahoga County 'As written, disorderly incriminate nearly group individual. With effort, imagine assemblages which, various times, Cleveland. Anyone become unwitting participant assembly, suffer penalty consequences. left decide extent 13.1124 applicable. Neither citizen hope himself lawful designed lay ascertainable rules guidelines govern enforcement. represents void.' Cleveland Anderson, App.2d 83, 90, 234 304, 308—309. Toledo, Municipal 'Under Sections 17—5—10 17—5—11, arrests prosecutions, effective Edmund Pendleton, Peyton Randolph, Richard Henry Lee, George Wythe, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Washington loitering congregating front Raleigh Tavern Duke Gloucester Williamsburg, Virginia, time during summer 1774 great annoyance Governor Dunsmore colonial constables.' Toledo Sims, Op.2d 169 516, 520. alleged figured prominently background serious civil disturbances took place 1967. Report Advisory Commission Civil Disorders 27 (1968).

Category: 2