- Information
- AI Chat
Case Brief 20 - Cohen v. California
American Constitutional Law: Civil Liberties (POL 226)
Wake Forest University
Preview text
POL 226, Dr. Harriger – Janice Park
Cohen v. California 403 U 15 (1971)
Facts:
Legally Relevant Facts
: Paul Robert Cohen, in a Los Angeles Courthouse, wore a jacket that had “Fuck the Draft” on it, in a corridor of the courthouse. He mentioned that he wore it to show his opposition towards Vietnam War
Procedurally Relevant Facts
: Cohen was convicted of a crime under the California law that prohibited “maliciously and willfully disturb[ing] the peace or quite of any neighborhood or person ... by ... offensive conduct,” which is a part of California Penal Code 415, and he was given 30 days of imprisonment. Although he argued that he “did not engage in, nor threaten to engage in, nor did anyone as the result of his conduct in fact commit or threaten to commit any act of violence, a Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction” with an argument that his action could have provoked others to act violently. Also, California Supreme Court declined review.
Issue(s):
Whether the state had a compelling reason to override First Amendment interests by making the
display of this single four-letter expletive a criminal offense.
Holding:
Reversed. “The State my not, consistently with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, make the
simple public display here involved of this single four-letter expletive a criminal offense”
Reasoning:
The Statue did not specifically stated that “certain kinds of otherwise permissible speech or conduct would nevertheless, under California law, not be tolerated in certain places.
Also, this case is not an example of a case where “prior decisions have established the power of government to deal more comprehensively with certain forms of individual expression simply upon a showing that such a form was employed.
His four words are not directed anyone, no one with normal cognitive skills will feel insulted, and holds and held no violent reactions.
Dissenting Arguments:
Justice Blackmun
“Cohen’s absurd and immature antic ... was mainly conduct and little speech”
“subsequent construction of the statue by the California Supreme Court removes the vagueness and overbreadth problems identified by the majority
Case Brief 20 - Cohen v. California
Course: American Constitutional Law: Civil Liberties (POL 226)
University: Wake Forest University
