Document: 436 U.S. 412 98 S.Ct. 1893 56 L.Ed.2d 417 In re Edna Smith PRIMUS, Appellant. No. 77-56. Argued Jan. 16, 1978. Decided May 30, Syllabus Appellant, a practicing lawyer in South Carolina who was also cooperating with branch of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), after advising gathering women their legal rights resulting from having been sterilized as condition receiving public medical assistance, informed one subsequent letter that free assistance available ACLU. Thereafter, disciplinary Board Supreme Court charged and determined appellant, by sending such letter, had engaged soliciting client violation certain Disciplinary Rules State Court, issued private reprimand. The court adopted Board's findings increased sanction to Held: Carolina's application its appellant's solicitation on ACLU's behalf violates First Fourteenth Amendments. NAACP v. Button, 371 415, 83 328, 9 405, followed; Ohralik Ohio Bar Assn., 447, 1912, 417, distinguished. Pp. 421-439. (a) Solicitation prospective litigants nonprofit organizations engage litigation "a form political expression" "political association" constitutes expressive associational conduct entitled Amendment protection, which government may regulate only "with narrow specificity," supra, at 429, 431, 433, 335, 337, 338. 422-425. (b) Subsequent decisions have interpreted Button establishing principle "collective activity undertaken obtain meaningful access courts is fundamental right within protection Amendment," United Transportation Michigan Bar, 401 576, 585, 91 1076, 1082, 28 339 required "broad rules framed protect preserve respect for administration justice" must not work significant impairment "the value freedoms," Mine Workers Illinois 389 217, 222, 88 353, 356, 19 426. P. (c) Appellant's this case comes generous zone reserved freedoms because she mail bona fide, organization pursues vehicle effective expression association, well means communicating useful information public. There nothing record suggest ACLU or affiliate an dedicated exclusively providing services, group attorneys exists purpose financial gain through he recovery counsel fees, mere sham evade valid state rule against pecuniary gain. 426-432. (d) question, sweep broadly, rather than regulating degree precision context distinct potential dampening kind "cooperative would make advocacy meaningful," 438, 340, permitting discretionary enforcement unpopular causes. 433. (e) Although showing danger suffice in-person under decision today Ohralik, appellant be disciplined unless her fact involved type misconduct broad prohibition said directed. 434. (f) does support appellee's contention undue influence, overreaching, misrepresentation, invasion privacy, conflict interest, lay interference actually occurred case. And State's interests preventing "stirring up" frivolous vexatious minimizing commercialization profession offer no further justification discipline administered appellant. 434-437. (g) Nothing should read foreclose carefully tailored regulation abridge unnecessarily freedom organizations, members, characteristics like those 438-439. 268 S.C. 259, 233 S.E.2d 301, reversed. Ray McClain, Charleston, S. C., Richard B. Kale, Jr., Columbia, appellee. Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 We consider appeal whether punish member who, seeking ideological goals activity, including litigation, advises person discloses associates are affiliated. Carolina, received reprimand writing letter. opposed Attorney General, Commissioners Grievances Discipline Carolina. As presents substantial question Amendments, 405 (1963), we noted probable jurisdiction. 2 * Primus, C. During period associated "Carolina Community Law Firm,"1 officer Columbia (ACLU).2 She ceived compensation ACLU,3 but paid retainer consultant Council Human Relations (Council), offices Columbia. 3 summer 1973, local national newspapers reported pregnant mothers Aiken County, were being threatened sterilization continued receipt Medicaid program.4 Concerned development, Gary Allen, businessman serving indigents, called requesting representatives come address some sterilized. At Council's behest, known Allen previously, him arranged meeting his office July 1973. Among attending Mary Etta Williams, Dr. Clovis H. Pierce birth third child. Williams grandmother attended old family friend, invited them wanted "[t]o see what it all about . ." App. 41-42. meeting, advised present, other Pierce, suggested possibility lawsuit. 4 Early August 1973 willing provide representation sterilized.5 Appellant testified wished institute suit decided inform representation. Shortly dated 19736—the centerpiece litigation—Williams visited discuss progress child ill. doctor's office, encountered latter's request signed release liability favor. showed doctor lawyer, they retained copy. then announced intention sue. communication between Williams. 5 On October 9, 1974, Secretary (Board) filed formal complaint Board, charging "solicitation Canons Ethics" 1-2. denied any unethical asserted, inter alia, protected Amendments Canon Code Professional Responsibility Association (ABA). heard panel March 20, 1975. evidence consisted testimony Williams,7 copy summons action instituted various officials, Walker Civ. 74-475 (SC, 28, 1975), aff'd part rev'd part, 560 F.2d 609 (CA4 1977), cert. denied, 434 1075, 1266, 55 782 (1978).8 Following denial motion dismiss, 77-82, own number representatives, several character witnesses.9 6 report recommending found guilty ACLU, (DR) 2-103(D)(5)(a) (c)10 2-104(A)(5)11 Carolina,12 issued. It "[t]he inconclusive [appellant] solicited Mrs. behalf, did solicit benefit financially event successful prosecution money damages." violated DR 2-103(D)(5) "by attempting non-profit which, primary purpose, renders where respondent's associate staff organization." 2-104(A)(5) unsolicited advice, join class damages relief brought 7 After hearing January 1976, full approved 17, 1977, entered order verbatim conclusions sanction, sua sponte, 301. 8 jurisdictional statement docketed. jurisdiction 3, sub nom. Smith, 814, 49, 54 69. now reverse. II This concerns tension contending values considerable moment society. Relying upon 3289, progeny, maintains constitutionally association. view, has shown meted out advances subordinating interest manner avoids unnecessary abridgment freedoms.13 Appellee counters falls outside acted lawfully punishing solicitation. 10 States enjoy power practice professions boundaries," lawyers especially great since essential governmental function administering justice, historically 'officers courts.' " Goldfarb Virginia 421 773, 792, 95 2004, 2016, 44 572 (1975). For exa ple, decide 444, vindicate legitimate regulatory proscription, circumstances, seek communicate purely commercial offers persons. 11 Unlike situation however, act took woman whom discussed redress allegedly unconstitutional sterilization. predicated entitlement share monetary recovery. actions express personal beliefs advance civil-liberties objectives derive presented whether, light these differences materially affect scope lawyers. III 12 Appeals held activities members National Advancement Colored People (NAACP) affiliate, Conference Branches (Conference), constituted business" law. Harrison, 202 Va. 142, 116 (1960). peaceably assemble branches groups advise relative matters concerning racial segregation," constitutional efforts "solicit authorize filing suits" NAACP-compensated attorneys. Id., 159, S.E.2d, 68-69. 13 reversed: "We hold NAACP, affiliates modes association prohibit, profession, improper business violative [state law] Ethics." U.S., 428-429, S.Ct., 335. litigants,14 many Conference, furthering civil-rights 'to advancement ideas.' 430, 336, quoting Alabama, 357 449, 460, 78 1163, 1170, 1488 (1958). 14 Since statute sought core Amendment's protective ambit, insisted "government area specificity." General argued law merely (i) proscribed control actual instituted, ibid., (ii) prevent evils traditionally common-law maintenance, champerty, barratry, id., 340.15 inadequate first absence neglect harassment clients, statute, construed, drawn narrowly asserted goal. rejected analogy offenses proof malicious intent prospect inspired NAACP-sponsored litigation. lack serious marked relationship nonmember Negro litigants. concluded "although [NAACP] amply fall protections, failed substantive flowing [the NAACP's] activities, can justify prohibitions imposed." 343.16 15 Amendment." (1971). See Bates Arizona, 433 350, 376 n. 32, 97 2691, 2705, 53 810 (1977). proscription range labor unions low-cost, members. Railroad Trainmen 377 1, 84 1113, 89 (1964); 426 (1967); supra. "lawyers accepting employment [such plans] cannot abridge." Trainmen, 8, 1118. Without denying take measures correct potentially present clients lawyers, freedoms." Workers, 356. IV 16 turn implicates sufficient level recognized cases.17 'solicit[ed] organization, organization.' S.C., 269, 306.18 defenses distinguishing before it. Whereas primarily 'political' used 'litigation adjunct overriding aims organization,' 'has purposes rendition services.' 268, 305, 306. intimated policy award fees indicated might 'benefit damages.' 263, 303. 17 permit factual development practices court's effort draw distinction NAACP. From appears, chapters, much "[engage] extensive educational lobbying activities" "also [devote] [their] funds energies program assisting kinds declared purposes." 419-420, 331. 177-178; 2, below acknowledged 'the cases civil liberties questions .' 440 19, 341. defense causes defendants19 represented individuals defined areas dissent, juvenile rights, prisoners' military law, amnesty, privacy. generally Rabin, Lawyers Social Change: Perspectives Public Interest Law, Stan.L.Rev. 207, 210-214 (1976). "litigation technique resolving differences"; association." 337.20 18 find equally unpersuasive suggestion scrutiny lowered possible premised solely herself, associates, representing plaintiffs litigation.21 conceded y question. undisputed neither nor shared Pierce. If elected bring suit, similar "organized by" organization. 434, 338, 457, 350 (Harlan, J., dissenting); 222-223, 356; supra.22 Contrary suggestion, Button. seeks requests often made both see, e. g., 493 614, 622 (CA5 1974); Boston Chapter, Inc. Beecher, F.Supp. 507, 523 (D.C.Mass.), aff'd, 504 1017 (CA1 1974), 910, 1561, 43 775 (1975), Legal Defense Fund, Inc., Bradley Richmond School 416 696, 94 2006, 40 476 (1974); Reynolds Coomey, 567 1166, 1167 1978). event, there awarded traditional fee-paying arrangements militate presumption sponsorship motivated considerations widely goal vindicating liberties. Counsel discretion court; awards plaintiff's recovery, usually outcome; amounts correspond obtainable Moreover, prevailing during events federal limited circumstances.23 even if gone central fund ACLU.24 increase maintenance same obtains voluntary contributions foundation support, rise victories important That possibility, standing alone, basis equating fees. supra.25 20 thus freedoms. engages infra; cf. 364, 2699; Pharmacy Citizens Consumer Council, 425 748, 779-780, 96 1817, 1834, 48 346 (1976) (STEWART, concurring). indicates, offered prove hearing, efficacy advancing cause depends ability suitable 'Free trade ideas' opportunity persuade action, describe facts." Thomas Collins, 323 516, 537, 65 315, 325 L.Ed. 430 (1945). require measure "advocating lawful rights," 437, "advis[ing] another infringed refer[ring] particular attorney assistance," V 21 litigant mail, withstand "exacting applicable limitations Buckley Valeo, 424 44-45, 612, 646, 46 659 demonstrate compelling," City Little Rock, 361 524, 80 412, 416, 480 (1960), employed furtherance "closely avoid Buckley, 25, 638. 22 contends taken aimed prevention interference, thought inhere us. Brief 37-49. do dispute importance interests. Court's makes clear, "[b]road prophylactic suspect," "[p]recision touchstone so closely touching our most precious 340; Because censorship selective prohibitions, "[b]ecause need breathing space survive, [this] A. 23 broadly. Under 2-103(D)(5), never give advice retain organization's seem assists cooperative suppress giving anyone will ultimate Tr. Oral Arg. 32-34. Notwithstanding concession far clear informational without breaching literal terms Rule. Cf. Memorandum Complaint, Apr. 1975, p. 9.26 punishment unaccompanied appellee sum, B 24 Even ignore breadth tha justifications advanced Court,27 think record—which inadequately developed—that compatible could New York Times Co. Sullivan, 254, 284-285, 710, 728, 686 (1964), "considerations judicial us review determine judgment [against appellant]. duty elaboration principles; proper principles [can be] applied." Jenkins Georgia, 418 153, 160-161, 2750, 2754, 2755, 41 642 Pickering Education, 391 563, 574-575, 578-582, 1731, 1737-1738, 1739-1742, 811 (1968); Edwards 372 229, 235-236, 680, 683, 697 (1963). 25 Where issue, tolerated imprecision characterizes affairs. approach adopt proscribe circumstances likely result adverse consequences, applied former context, 26 privacy followed up earlier meeting—one concededly Amendments—by notifying interested supporting imparted additional material making permitted opportunity, exercised, arriving deliberate decision. facially misleading; indeed, "to explain you understand going on." transmittal letter—as contrasted solicitation—involved appreciable privacy;28 afford overreaching coercion. written lessens substantially difficulty policing offend professional conduct. 466-467, 1924-1925. certainly more harmful consequences considered 14, 27 Nor finding likelihood injurious attorney-client relationship. Admittedly, whenever supports NAACP's nonmembers disavowal short integration, 420, 331, 465, 352, 354 dissenting). But insufficient "serious danger" 443, 343, organizational 343. "[n]othing shows nature [ACLU] permits inference intervention application," 344, activity.29 A "very distant harm," 223, revealed record. 223-224, 356-357.30 declined accept proffered "for gain, interest," 40, 341; 439-444, 341-343. follows facts marginal force where, here, services charge sophistication necessary tap alternative sources aid.31 29 bottom, rests proposition fashion gives communicates layman. appropriate speech simply "propose[s] transaction," Pittsburgh Press Comm'n, 413 376, 385, 93 2553, 2558, 37 669 (1973). 455-459, 1918-1920. significantly greater precision.32 VI 30 reasonable restrictions time, place, Bar. 384, S.C ., 2709; 771, 1830, cited therein. special whose licenses, serve officers courts, justifies misleading, overbearing, involves features deception influence.33 forbid evils. insist exert over ensuing 345 (WHITE, concurring dissenting part). Accordingly, 31 conclude DR2-103(D)(5)(a) 32 Reversed. 33 BRENNAN consideration 34 BLACKMUN, concurring. 35 I my understanding paragraph Part requires explanation. dicta contained overtones. one, am able delineate extent authority misleading statements. Despite positive language text,* footnote explains refused line regarding misrepresentation: 36 occasion here precise contours permissible regulation. Thus, example, different innocent negligent misstatement interests." resolution balancing lurk misstatement. wisely postponed task until arguments considered. 38 REHNQUIST, dissenting. 39 companion tells tale two lawyers: One ends happily not. given latitude novelists deciding happy unhappy endings heroes villains tales, disposition cases. system shall admitted remain there; interfere rendered impermissible Constitution. can, course, develop jurisprudence epithets slogans area, "ambulance chasers" suffer fate "civil lawyers" another. unpersuaded opinions principled concluding disciplining Primus believe limits prescribed therefore affirm each Michigan, (1971): "The common threat running [371 Brotherhood ] [v. 337 (1964),] (1967),] collective ignores thread fabric case, decides badgering citizen activity" desired join. Neither compels uninvited individual basis. Further, agree strong forestalling "when trained art persuasion, personally solicits unsophisticated, injured, distressed person." 1923. reversal seems me quite unsupported previous abstracted them. 42 Primus' Ohralik's unprotected solicitation, lamely declares: discarded 'common-sense' proposing transaction, occurs subject regulation, varieties speech." 455-456, 1918. Yet "common-sense" focuses content speech, least suspect cases, g. Police Dept. Chicago Mosley, 408 92, 96-98, 92 2286, 2290-2291, 212 (1972), motive speaker, manipulation clever practitioners. Albert viewed 'not [as] differences,' 'a expression' 'political association,' ante, 428, appears restored practice. sure next shoes cloaked mantle assure insurance companies unfair advantage policyholders. unfortunate radical difference bear area. proposes recognizes protecting public." 468, 1925. hand, § (at identical instant case)1 "[w]here issue," "may involve[s] directed." Ante, confidence prophylactically specific harm. assertion contrary, 438 drawing distinctions speaker reason avoiding undertaking objective standard readily available. inquiry focus regulate, motives involved. empowered deems detrimental foreclosed doing construing 45 ranks, instituting maintaining achieve desegregation schools. utilized letters, bulletins, petition drives, 422, 332, apparently directed toward 338,2 organize meetings plaintiffs. described played role solicitation: "Typical y, invite parents children steps desegregation. printed forms authorizing him, Fund designation, represent signers proceedings desegregation." 421, 332. 47 punished Commonwealth litigation.3 Here, attempted laymen instigator sue remains future Likewise, gatherings sort rights. contact place gathering, evidently response meeting. initiating expressed desire become organized While nowhere explicitly 49 understands Rule enforced services." entirely reasonable. rightly fear powers persuasion possessed laymen, 464-465, 1923, potent person. Such unsophisticated layman into contrary best interests, compare 1906-1908, 464-467, 1923-1925, citizens defend baseless otherwise brought. 50 minimized proceeds conviction reasonably lawyer's resolve "substantial questions," 303 (1977), occasionally precedence client. inclined pursue culpable blameless defendants last ditch goals.4 litigants, use purposes, C rolina likewise restrict attempt so. 51 imposed violate Constitution, Firm 'an expense sharing arrangement keeping fees.' 261, 302 firm later changed name Buhl, & Bagby. 1920 worked conscientious objectors World War dissidents postwar period. views itself "national non-partisan defending Bill Rights compromise." Presenting (1948). campaigns avowed goals. 211-212 (1976); Note, Private Attorneys-General: Group Action Fight Liberties, 58 Yale L.J. 574, 576 (1949); 185-186. Markmann, Noblest Cry: History (1965); D. Johnson, Challenge Freedoms: Rise three maintained ACLU—appellant Carlton Bagby unsalaried Herbert Buhl counsel—appellant handle [the] ACLU." 134. See, Doctors Are Inquiry Sterilization Welfare Mothers, Times, 22, cols. 1-3. 94-95, 131-133, 135-137; 8. Written stationery Firm, stated: Marietta 347 Sumter Street Aiken, 29801 Dear Williams: You remember talking Allen's performed you. file lawsuit your operation. coming near on. Now ask Would object women's magazine Aiken? feature story whole problem wants talk others don't mind this, call collect 254-8151 Friday 5:00, receive time. Or Tuesday m rning (after Labor Day) collect. want interview done show happening wishes, harm way. decide, let know stop. About lawsuit, interested, know, I'll when down \talk Waters time; already asked behalf. Sincerely, s/ Attorney-at-law 3-4. remedies, coerced, willingness compensation. recounted told critical condition, "did time for" "would more." suing doctor. 29-34, 58. cross-examination, confirmed affidavit pressure lawsuit." 52. infra. April 15, alleging conspiracy them, threatening so, account race children, while program. declaratory injunctive relief, damages, attorney's violations Constitution U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985(3), 2000d. Bagby, fellow women. produce expert effect safeguarding inarticulate, economically disadvantaged aware availability counsel, 166-168; liberties, 183-186; relies constitu ional 187-188. These germane proceeding. DR2-103(D) provides: "(D) knowingly assist recommends, furnishes, pays promote partners associates. However, cooperate dignified service following, provided independent exercised person: "(1) aid defender office: "(a) Operated sponsored duly accredited school. "(b) fide community "(c) agency. "(d) Operated, sponsored, bar representative general geographical exists. "(2) office. "(3) referral operated, "(4) "(5) Any beneficiaries, instances controlling interpretation allowance following conditions, prohibited interpretation, met: include services. recommending, furnishing, paying incidental related lawyer. beneficiary rendered, matter." DR2-104(A) "(A) except that: close relative, (if employment), believes results participation designed educate recognize problems, intellige t selection utilize conducted enumerated 2-103(D)(1) (5), conditions furnished 2-103(D)(1), (2), (5) thereof affecting employment, speak publicly write publication topics long emphasize experience reputation undertake advice. success asserting dependent joinder others, accept, seek, contacted obtaining joinder." Section 4(b) Procedure defines "violation Ethics S.C.Code, 59 ABA's Responsibility. 48. revised ABA, revision. addition claim decision, failure fair notice charges leveled proceeding due process, Ruffalo, 390 544, 1222, 117 elements Thompson Louisville, 362 199, 624, 654 (1960); (iii) void vagueness Bouie 378 347, 1697, 894 (1964). view reach contentions. terms: "Typically, [NAACP Legal] occasion, blank staff, usual authorizations, brought, sometimes Fund. effect, then, retains 'firm' "These prompted letters bulletins urging active fight segregation. distributed petitions school boards, officials obtain, petitioners, persons 'go way' ensue." 421-422, Put simply, helping prosecute suit; champerty return barratry continuing champerty. W. Blackstone, Commentaries 134-136; Zimroth, Services 76 966, 969-970 Radin, Maintenance Champerty, Calif.L.Rev. (1935). Whatever holding "advising Negroes kind, financing litigation." Term, "occasion enjoin fact, recommended recommendations nonmembers." 7, 1117, 221, 356 (1967). dissent REHNQUIST suggests distinguishable role" Post, 3. recognized, ourt found, 154-155, 55, efforts. involvement Indeed, disciplined; came posture anticipatory relief. decree attorneys, evidence," acceptance ban canons ethics. 164, 72. "finds fault unsolicited. doubt 30. discussion follows, treat separately based. narrower 2-104(A)(5), 26, infra, determination unconstitutionality subsume latter. Scopes State, 154 Tenn. 105, 289 S.W. 363 (1927); De Jonge Oregon, 299 57 255, 81 278 (1937); Hague CIO, 307 496, 954, 1423 (1939); Wieman Updegraff, 344 183, 73 215, 216 (1952); O'Brien, 367, 1673, 672 Oestereich Selective Service Bd., 393 233, 414, 402 (1968). provision either "is cover attempt," Eastern Presidents Conf. Noerr Motor Freight, 365 127, 144, 523, 532, 464 (1961), Compare Valentine Chrestensen, 316 52, 62 920, 921, 86 1262 (1942), 266, 718, California Transport Trucking Unlimited, 404 508, 515, 609, (1972). conjectures foundations enhanced acknowledged, conferred benefit, 24, attach significance Doe expenses. nn. petitioner expenses handling involving discrimination, supported fee $60 per day almost invariably staff." Petitioner Gray, O.T.1962, 5, pp. 9-10. Alyeska Pipeline Wilderness Society, 240, 1612, 141 statutory authorization, "bad faith" "common fund" benefit" Fourth Circuit anticipated ruling Alyeska. Richmond, 472 318, 327-331 vacated remanded grounds, 310, 321 (1965). informs ACLU-sponsored Reply 4-5; 173-175, 181-183; 1976 Policy Guide Union, # 512, 302: "Under way payment donation. smallest exception jeopardize effectiveness entire program." Apparently feared allowing lead reasons. 182. 1977 experimentation court-awarded chapter option. 5-6. analysis latter Internal Revenue requirements "public firms" tax-exempt status 501(c)(3) 1954, 501(c)(3). rendered; "in cases" administrative agency; "not probability ; (iv) defray "more percent total cost functions" exemption granted; (v) directly attorneys; (vi) Rev.Proc. 75-13, 1975-1 Cum.Bull. 662. Rev.Ruls. 75-74 75-76, 152-155. construed below, stands separate though 2-104(A), bars employment. abridged appellate court. Bank Bellotti, 435 765, 789-790, 1407, 1422-1423, 707 (1978); 581, 1080, (1971); Sherbert Verner, 374 398, 407, 1790, 1795, 965 (1963); 442-443, 342-343; Wood 370 375, 388, 82 1364, 1371, 569 (1962); 530, 536, 322, 325, adequate finding, appe lant deliberately thrust communicated unambiguously Rowan Post Office Dept., 397 90 1484, 736 (1970). credit Williams' conflicting "didn't suing" "if needed you." 74; testimony, characterized tactic. month elapsed Not period, friend family, subsequently lawsuit; corroborated testimony. 115-116, 137, 195-196. acknowledgment lawsuit," go beyond pale constitution single imparting new inquiring it." accordance broader objectives, made. 513, 305. income rises outcome 428-431, 24. "regulations reflect hostility stirring chiefly urge recourse 440, 341, "[o]bjection intermediary derives element gain," 441, 342. recognition overarching obligation community, ABA Responsibility, ethical representation, charge, extended unable own. Ades, 467, 475-476 (Md.1934); Gunnels Atlanta 191 Ga. 366, 602 (1940); Association, Opinions Committee Ethics, Formal Opinion 148, 416-419 Normally "an aspect 'expression'," Emerson, Freedom Expression, 74 plenary government. "cooperative, activity," "freedom ideas," (1958), implicit guarantee Amendment. Healy James, 169, 181, 2338, 2346, 266 above, speech—as activity—was intended "beliefs ideas." ideas; line, based always easy draw, 787-788, 1838, 246 (REHNQUIST, dissenting), undertaking. 438. reserves here. instance, arise herself depended 428-429 21, emphasizes conducting Finally, points "communicated litigation," effected person, 435, 437. All reservations imply raise absolute variations, "[i]n 437-438. 439 (BLACKMUN, 462-463 1922, reading today's holding. wrongdoing proscribe." Of recognizing courts," (1971), 577-578, 1078; 218, 354, prohibit," technically dictum. conclusion unprecedented unsound. concerned, certiorari color (1978).

Category: 5