|
Abstract
| Argument: |
Wednesday, January 24, 1968
|
| Decision: |
Monday, May 27, 1968 |
| Issues: |
First Amendment, Protest Demonstrations |
| Categories: |
criminal, first amendment, freedom of speech, symbolic speech |
|
Advocates
|
Facts of the Case
David O'Brien burned his draft card at a Boston courthouse. He said he was expressing his opposition to war. He was convicted under a federal law that made the destruction or mutilation of drafts card a crime.
Question
Was the law an unconstitutional infringement of O'Brien's freedom of speech?
Conclusion
No. The 7-to-1 majority, speaking through Chief Justice Earl Warren, established a test to determine whether governmental regulation involving symbolic speech was justified. The formula examines whether the regulation is unrelated to content and narrowly tailored to achieve the government's interest. "[W]e think it clear," wrote Warren," that a government regulation is sufficiently justified if it is within the constitutional power of the Government; if it furthers an important or substantial governmental interest; if the governmental interest is unrelated to the suppression of free expression; and if the incidential restriction on alleged First Amendment freedoms is not greater than is essential to the furtherance of that interest."