Court Opinion

ID: 9425847
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:15:58.324195+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:57.984149
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Marshall,
with whom Mr. Justice Brennan joins,
dissenting.
The Court’s decision in Parker v. Levy, 417 U. S. 733 (1974), establishes that the Court of Appeals erred in overturning appellee’s court-martial conviction on the basis of the unconstitutional vagueness of Art. 134. In these circumstances, I agree that this case does not present an appropriate vehicle for this Court’s consideration of the substantial jurisdictional issues presented. Ap-pellee also claimed, however, that Arts. 80 and 134, as applied to his case, infringed his First Amendment rights, claims rejected by the District Court but never *682passed upon by the Court of Appeals because of that court’s holding as to the vagueness of Art. 134. See 155 U. S. App. D. C. 352, 354, 477 F. 2d 1237, 1239 (1973). I think it inappropriate for this Court to pass on these • claims without the benefit of the Court of Appeals’ consideration in the first instance. I would therefore vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand for reconsideration of the jurisdictional questions and the merits in light of Parker v. Levy.