Document: 485 U.S. 312 108 S.Ct. 1157 99 L.Ed.2d 333 Michael BOOS, J. Waller and Bridget Brooker, Petitionersv.Marion S. BARRY, Jr., Mayor, District of Columbia, et al. No. 86-803. Argued Nov. 9, 1987. Decided March 22, 1988. Syllabus Columbia Code § 22-1115 makes it unlawful, within 500 feet a foreign embassy, either to display any sign that tends bring the government into "public odium" or disrepute" (display clause), congregate refuse obey police dispersal order (congregation clause). Petitioners, who wish engage in conduct would violate bothclauses, filed suit Federal Court against respondent city officials, asserting facial First Amendment challenge 22-1115. The court granted respondents' motion for summary judgment, Appeals affirmed, concluding both clauses were constitutional. Held: judgment is affirmed part reversed part. 255 U.S.App.D.C. 19, 798 F.2d 1450 (1986), Justice O'CONNOR delivered opinion with respect Parts I, II-B, III, IV, V, that: 1 1. Section 22-1115's clause facially violative Amendment, since content-based restriction on political speech public forum, which not narrowly tailored serve compelling state interest. Assuming, without deciding, protecting dignity diplomats by shielding them from criticism their governments "compelling" interest purposes, ready availability significantly less restrictive alternative—18 U.S.C. 112, prohibits intimidating, coercing, harassing officials obstructing performance duties—amply demonstrates sufficiently withstand exacting scrutiny. Respondents' defense further undercut 1302 Omnibus Diplomatic Security Anti-terrorism Act 1986, Congress requested review revise rights, responded repealing section, contingent prior extension 112 District. This may rely Congress, body primarily responsible implementing international law obligations, adequately satisfies Government's diplomatic personnel that, accordingly, tailored. Pp. 321-329. 2 2. congregation clause, as construed Appeals, Amendment. overbroad, even though its actual language problematic because applies reason an embassy appears place no limits authority. These difficulties are alleviated Appeals' narrowing construction permits only congregations directed at when reasonably believe embassy's "security peace" threatened. Thus, does reach substantial amount constitutionally protected conduct, merely regulates manner certain demonstrations, site specific areas embassies, prohibit peaceful congregations. Nor narrowed, impermissibly vague simply has defined limited word "peace." Given particular context crafted, apparent prohibited quantum disturbance determined whether normal activities have been about be disrupted. 329-332. 3 3. contention 22-1116 excludes labor picketing general prohibitions, require unequal treatment nonlabor violation Equal Protection Clause merit. 22-1116's primary function ensuring did largely pre-empted this Court's conclusion violates Moreover, under applying threaten security peace, congregation, including permitted. will adopt unreasonable interpretation sole purpose protect violent equal protection. 332—334. 4 O'CONNOR, joined STEVENS SCALIA, concluded Part II-A content-based, front depends entirely upon picket signs critical government. argument content neutral select between viewpoints, but determines sign's permissible message solely basis government's policies, merit, viewpoint-neutral regulation entire category here, governments. Also rejected clause's real concern suppression speech, rather "secondary effect" obligation shield offends dignity, Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 41, 106 925, 89 29. As used Renton, phrase effects" refers secondary features happen associated type nothing do content, whereas, asserted justification focuses direct emotive impact audience. 318-321. 5 BRENNAN, MARSHALL, agreeing analysis constitutes restriction, cannot include listeners' reactions nature turn "aims" effects," rate, should businesses purveying sexually explicit materials applied speech. creates extensive dangers uncertainty, denies speakers right speak listeners undistorted debate. traditional bright-line rule continue apply, whereby application turns speech's regardless underlying motivation. 334-338. 6 J., STEVENS, JJ., joined, III all participating Members II-A, joined. concurring post, p. ----. REHNQUIST, C.J., dissenting part, WHITE BLACKMUN, KENNEDY, took consideration decision case. 7 Raymond D. Battocchi, Washington, D.C., petitioners. 8 Edward E. Schwab, respondents. 9 Edwin Kneedler, amicus curiae, supporting respondents, special leave Court. 10 Court, except II-A. 11 question presented case provision Code, 22-1115, section if disrepute." It also three more persons embassy. 12 * Petitioners individuals carry Governments Soviet Union Nicaragua sidewalks embassies those D.C. M. Brooker Boos, example, stating "RELEASE SAKHAROV" "SOLIDARITY" Embassy. Petitioner wishes reading "STOP THE KILLING" Nicaraguan All petitioners two other official buildings. 13 Asserting D.C.Code (1981) engaging these expressive activities, petitioners, together Father R. David Finzer, brought Columbia. They named Mayor enforcement defendants. United States intervened curiae constitutionality statute. 14 enacted 1938, S.J.Res. 191, ch. 29, 1, 52 Stat. 30 (1938), pursuant authority Article 8, cl. 10, Constitution "define punish . Offenses Law Nations." reads pertinent follows: 15 "It shall unlawful flag, banner, placard, device designed adapted intimidate, coerce, odium government, party, organization, officer officers thereof, disrepute political, social, economic acts, views, purposes party organization building premises occupied representative representatives legation, consulate, such premises, disperse after having ordered so authorities said District." 16 first portion statute, "display" tending disrepute, policies. signs, spoken word. See Zaimi States, 155 66, 82, 476 511, 527 (1973). second "congregation" addresses different concern. common defines assemblage people. Reed, Cr. 2021-67 (D.C.Ct.Gen.Sess., May 11, 1967) (reprinted App. Kinoy 130 290, 298, 400 761, 769 (1968)); Hunter 47 App.D.C. 406, 409 (1918). Both prohibitions generally operate 500-foot zone surrounding consulates owned governments, statute can extend buildings inside some purpose. 17 relying earlier decision, Frend 69 281, 100 691 cert. denied, 306 640, 59 488, 83 L.Ed. 1040 (1939), had sustained similar challenge. A divided panel affirmed. Finzer Barry, (1986). Although found "persuasive precedent," thought was binding "was decided almost half century ago interval Supreme developed constitutional ways must taken account." U.S.App.D.C., 23, F.2d, 1454. 18 considered aspects separately. First, Relying, however, our decisions Perry Education Assn. Local Educators' Assn., 460 37, 45, 103 948, 954, 74 794 (1983), Carey Brown, 447 455, 461-462, 2286, 2290-2291, 65 263 (1980), nonetheless justified governmental drawn Second, authorize "only threat peace present," construed, survived 40, 1471. 19 We certiorari, 479 1083, 107 1282, 94 141 (1987). now reverse affirm clause. II A. 20 Analysis begin several important provision. operates core prohibiting classically recognized reflects "profound national commitment" principle "debate issues uninhibited, robust, wide-open," New York Times Co. Sullivan, 376 254, 270, 84 710, 721, 686 (1964), consistently commented central importance issues. See, e.g., Connick Myers, 461 138, 145, 1684, 1689, 75 708 (1983); NAACP Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 886, 913, 102 3409, 3425, 73 1215 (1982); supra, U.S., 467, 2293. led us scrutinize carefully restrictions issue picketing. Grace, 171, 1702, 736 supra; Police Department Chicago Mosley, 408 92, 92 33 212 (1972). 21 bars streets sidewalks, fora "time out mind, assembly, communicating thoughts citizens, discussing questions." Hague CIO, 307 496, 515, 964, 1423 (1939) (Roberts, J.). In places, occupy "special position terms protection," 180, S.Ct., 1708, ability restrict activity "is very limited." Id., 177, 1707. 22 Third, based. Whether not. One completely embassies. Other categories favorable concerning dispute (1981). 23 majority dissent accepted sense indicated, could argued 38, n. 15, 1469, 15. respondents made contend based itself selecting viewpoints; policies 24 reject contention, although we agree viewpoint acceptable fashion looking While prevents being directly based, label potential ramifications own, see, City Council Los Angeles Taxpayers Vincent, 466 789, 804, 104 2118, 80 772 (1984); Schacht 398 58, 63, 90 1555, 1559, 26 44 (1970), render neutral. Rather, held "does favor side controversy" impermissible "First Amendment's hostility extends prohibition discussion topic." Consolidated Edison Public Service Comm'n, 530, 537, 2326, 2333, 319 (1980). Here speech—signs displays governments—is 25 most recently definition content-neutral 29 Drawing decisions, described " 'content-neutral' 'are reference regulated speech.' Virginia Pharmacy Board Citizens Consumer Council, 425 748, 771 [96 1817, 1830, 48 346] (1976) (emphasis added)." 48, 929. movie theater involved, treating "theaters specialize adult films differently kinds theaters." 47, But while shown theaters irrelevant target regulation. Instead, ordinance aimed effects community," Ibid. original), unique featuring films, i.e., prevention crime, maintenance property values, protection residential neighborhoods. short, aim free expression. Respondents attempt arguing here too effect, namely, dignity. think misreads Renton. spoke referring regulations apply regulatory targets So long justifications desire suppress crime theaters, properly analyzed 27 Regulations focus audience present situation. Listeners' referred To take example factually close there city's prevent psychological damage felt viewing movies, then measure appropriate. hypothetical feature happens 28 Applying principles hand leads readily content-based. point congestion, interference ingress egress, visual clutter, need they listeners. effect." Because due impact, conclude B Our cases indicate subjected required State show "regulation necessary achieve end." 955. Accord, Airport Comm'rs Jews Jesus, 482 569, 572-573, 2568, 2571, 96 (1987); Cornelius Legal Defense & Educational Fund, 473 788, 800, 105 3439, 3448, 87 567 (1985); consider serves personnel. Since affronted told, shielded insults fulfill country's obligations law. 31 matter, indicated debate own citizens tolerate insulting, outrageous, provide "adequate 'breathing space' freedoms Amendment." Hustler Magazine, Inc. Falwell, 46, 56, 876, 882, 41 (1988). also, 720. "dignity" standard, like "outrageousness" standard Hustler, inherently subjective inconsistent "our longstanding refusal [punish speech] adverse emotional audience." 55, 882. 32 persuaded differences American deviate here. recognition States' Vienna Convention Relations, April 18, 1961, [1972] U.S.T. 3227, T.I.A.S. 7502, parties represents current law, imposes host states "[the] duty appropriate steps mission intrusion impairment dignity." 3237-3238, Art. 22. 34 proposition, course correct vital complying attempts expressly authorizing "[t]o define Piracies Felonies committed high Seas, Const., 10. Cf. Federalist 3, 43 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961) (J. Jay). emissaries history noble country ambassadors ministers predates Constitution. 1781 Continental adopted resolution calling enact laws punishing "infractions immunities ministers, authorised received assembled," targeting "violence offered persons, houses, carriages property." Cong. 1781, pp. 1136-1137 (G. Hunt 1912). 35 grounded Nation's relations. leading commentator observed 1758, "[i]t nations treat hold intercourse together, promote interests,—to avoid injuring each other,—and adjust terminate disputes." Vattel, Nations 452 Chitty 1844) (translation). observation true today given global economy extent actions parts world affect security. essential affairs crucial well-being Nation. addition, light concept reciprocity governs much area, see C. Wilson, Privileges Immunities (1967), parochial country. Doing ensures protections accorded send abroad represent thus citizens. Recent replete attempts, unfortunately successful, harass harm officials. combine make powerful indeed. 36 At same time, well established "no agreement nation confer power branch Government, restraints Constitution." Reid Covert, 354 16, 77 1222, 1230, 1148 (1957). Restatement Foreign Relations 131, Comment a, 53 (Tent.Draft 6, Apr. 12, 1985) ("[R]ules provisions agreements subject Bill Rights requirements effect them"). 37 fact automatically analysis. decide whether, what extent, dictates ever adjusted accommodate interests Even assume recognizes support 954; Angeles, 573, 2571. 38 useful starting assessing compare analogous Convention. Title 112(b)(2) subjects criminal punishment willful acts "intimidate, threaten, guest obstruct his duties." 39 Its legislative reveals deliberate effort implement obligations. 118 Cong.Rec. 27112-27113 legislation freedoms. For original contained official," version 112. similarities punished anyone 40 "parades, pickets, sign, device, utters word, phrase, sound, noise, threatening, him Official Guests Pub.L. 92-539, 301(c)(1), 86 1070, 1073 Concerned might freedoms, Senate added new subsection, directed: 42 "[N]othing abridge exercise rights guaranteed amendment States." 301(e), 1073. S.Rep. 92-1105, U.S.Code Admin.News 1972 1255, 1258. After passage form, congressional concerns apparently escalated than abated. 1976, revisited area repealed antipicketing provision, leaving official." 112(b)(2). modifying motivated concerns: 45 "This [of anti-picketing provision] raises serious Constitutional questions purview 94-1273, (1976); H.R.Rep. 94-1614, Admin. News 4480, 4484. 46 careful balancing Constitution's expression, outside necessary, "appropriate" step 2, U.S.T., 3237 ("special steps"). "within Columbia." 112(b)(3). history, exclusion statute's explained 22-1115; informed "similar" already 19; 92-1268, statutes, identical, significant. obvious ways, considerably foremost, activity, effects. unlike picketing; undertaken harass." Indeed, permitted development Convention, little force give deference supposed demands approach reflected If rest country, counter-argument higher concentration locales therefore necessary. arguably incorrect (New reported greater number missions, Note, Regulating Embassy Picketing Forum, 55 Geo.Wash.L.Rev. 908, 928, 140 (1987)), logically beside equally one hundred. points Congress' exclusive over 17, argues justifies measures. fail why measures 49 Congressional action ruling casts doubt validity causes reached result stands. Antiterrorism said: 50 "(1) [T]he demonstrations near missions (D.C. sec. 22-1115) reasonable selectively enforced, demonstrators unfairly arrested law; "(2) adequate balanced assembly; 51 "(3) therefore, and, appropriate, revisions consultation Secretary Treasury." 99-399, 1302, 853, 897. sense-of-the-Congress originated proposal repeal amend sponsor noted excluding assumed similar, "in way similar." 132 15329 (1986) (Sen. Grassley). passed bill ibid., Conference Committee concerned objections arising tenets "home rule" id., 20913. Self-Government Governmental Reorganization Act, Pub L. 93-198, 774 (establishing home rule). replace quoted above. request embodied contingent, acting Officials, Guests, Internationally Protected Persons 1987, 7-138, D.C.Reg. 728-729 (Feb. 5, 1988). 112(b)(3) (Section Columbia"). 54 recent round yet making effective, When claim gravely weakened: so, longer considers comply Relying delicate alternatives amply crafted sufficient precision tailored; alternative available. Wygant Jackson Bd. Ed., 267, 280, 1842, 1850, 260 (plurality opinion). assuming "compelling," initially attack confers unbridled discretion police. addressing overbreadth challenge, court's task ascertain enactment reaches conduct. Houston Hill, 451, 458-459, 2502, 2508, Hoffman Estates Flipside, Estates, 455 489, 494, 1186, 1191, 71 362 (1982). assessment, text limiting constructions developed. Kolender Lawson, 352, 355, 1855, 1857, 903 5. 56 "to [embassy, consulate] police." 57 Standing alone, provided alleviates difficulties. 58 observe, read distinct infirmity latter former. 1472, 17. followed lead Travers, 98 Daily Wash.L.Rptr. 1505 (D.C.Ct.Gen.Sess. 1970), embassy; grant "police reasons nearby embassy." 1472. Finally, circumscribed holding present." protest narrow According legislation, brings sweep indicating federal courts unless apparent. Grayned Rockford, 104, 110, 2294, 2300, 222 (1972); Gooding 405 518, 520-521, 1103, 1105, purpose, overlooks Council. Whalen 445 684, 687-688, 1432, 1435-1436, 63 715 settled legislation. Ferber, 747, 769, 24, 3348, 3361, 1113 Thirty-seven Photographs, 402 363, 368-370, 91 1400, 1404-1405, 822 (1971). doing fairly possible. 24; 369, 1404; Schneider Smith, 390 26-27, 88 682, 799 (1968). administrative transfer diminish counsel oral argument, independent here." Tr. Oral Arg. 28. Accordingly, barrier adoption construction. 60 withstands conduct; demonstrations. Unlike breach Cox Louisiana, 379 536, 85 453, 471 (1965), specific; 559, 568, 476, 483, 487 (1965) (ordinance "near" courthouse upheld; cited approval specification feet); Grayned, 120-121, 2301, 2305-2306 (upholding ban school; relevant judging reasonableness restraint). congregations; groups posing threat. noted, "where violent, lose quality expression 116, 2303. limitations reaching consistent 61 argue narrowed invalid vague. particular, "peace," limited. identical supra. That schools "disturb[ing] schools. 107-108, 2298-2299. "particular context" gave fair notice scope: "Although specified ordinance, announced school disrupted." 2301. presents context, "prohibited disturbance" communicates words understanding, ibid.; Cameron Johnson, 611, 616, 1335, 1338, 182 (1968), accordingly petitioners' vagueness IV 62 addition challenges raise argument. (1972), virtue 22-1116, 22-1115: [§ 22-1115] picketing, bona fide disputes regarding alteration, repair, occupied, business wholly governments." 64 No intent ensure "picketing" implicated exempt offended thereby concerns, contrary conceivably And Therefore, congregations, prohibited. run afoul Clause. view, interpreted manner. statutes face admonishes "prohibit picketing." picketing" all, proviso evinces "bona fide" disputes. safe "good faith" disagreements falls short insulate construe 66 intended invalid. Viewing eliminates V 67 unconstitutional face. unconstitutional. 68 ordered. KENNEDY 70 whom MARSHALL joins, judgment. I join O'CONNOR's opinion. concludes set forth merits strict Whatever means, write separately, register my continued disagreement proposition otherwise recast "content neutral" 933 (BRENNAN, dissenting), object assumption 72 posed extensive. easy enough determine future litigants unlikely bold forthright defend aims indignity hearing criticizes them. likely pointing, suggests, "congestion, ." Ante, 321. offer countless excuses plausible gatherings others attract large crowds causing cause delivering unruly rejects priori categorical judgments 100-101, 2292-2293, requiring regulate violence predictions induce analysis, possible avenue censorship whenever censors concoct "secondary" rationalizations regulating provides none clear lines sanctuaries demands. sets rule: motivation lies behind it. That, always implicit term test "content-based" "motivation-based" test. guidance. scope Individuals contrast, plunges morass motive, notoriously hazardous indeterminate inquiry, particularly where, approach, posited flies plain statutory language. O'Brien, 391 367, 383-384, 1673, 1682-1683, 672 where motivational inquiry resolved, saddles fuzzy distinction prove just unworkable direct/indirect distinctions jurisprudence proved. Compare, Complete Auto Transit, Brady, 430 274, 97 1076, 326 (1977) (criticizing wisely rejecting indirect taxation interstate commerce); Tribe, 6-4, (2d 1988) (noting abandoned commerce). indeterminacy hardly worst flaw, root problem relies dubious discriminates operation ill-defined certainly exacerbates risk many disfavored go undetected. motive sometimes supplement, best squelch opposition never lain assess purity requirement act through means favors disfavors. Jackson's felicitous nearly years ago: "Courts better assure operation." Railway Express Agency, York, 336 106, 113, 463, 93 533 (1949) (concurring confident types still offend fundamental denying precious distorted dangers, uncertainties, caused regrettable unlikelihood legitimate (especially speech) ample advancing goals least sought regulated—the social decay neighborhoods—could be. absent demonstrable showing necessity, hard how convincing content. conceive situation Until today, however unwise, seemed confine "businesses purvey materials." 49, 929, day Justices reiterated Pacific Gas Electric Utilities 20, 903, Powell, J.) ("For place, valid, regulated"). Widmar 454 263, 269, 440 (evaluating religious use university scrutiny applicable avoiding perceived Establishment problems, speech).* True, today's dictum: challenged treated easily stated restriction. ominous dictum, road evisceration hope actually involving allegedly so-called recognize pitfalls approach. 76 Chief BLACKMUN join, Judge Bork below, uphold However, exemption Clause, And, suggested above, strong arguments exist for, minimum, confining situations amenable

Category: 2