The Oyez Project: Civil Rights Issues - Sit-In Demonstrations Decisions http://www.oyez.org/issues/civil-rights/sitin-demonstrations/ U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en-us Abernathy v. Alabama <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1964/1964_9/ Avent v. North Carolina <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_11/ Barr v. City Of Columbia <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_9/ Bell v. Maryland <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_12/ Bouie v. City Of Columbia <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_10/ Boynton v. Virginia <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1960/1960_7/ Brown v. Louisiana <p>Did the actions of the arresting officer infringe upon Brown's (and his companions') freedom of speech, assembly, and freedom to petition the Government for redress of grievances as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?</p><p>The divided Court found that the actions of the police violated the Constitution. Justice Fortas argued that states may only regulate the use of public facilities in a "reasonably nondiscriminatory manner, equally applicable to all." Maintaining separate library facilities clearly violated this principle. Fortas also reasoned that the demonstration did not disturb the peace of other library patrons or disrupt the library's activities; the time and method of the sit-in were carefully chosen and executed. Justice Black dissented, joined by three other justices. He argued that the First Amendment "does not guarantee to any person the right to use someone else's property, even that owned by government and dedicated to other purposes, as a stage to express dissident ideas."</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1965/1965_41/ Garner v. Louisiana <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1961/1961_26/ Gober v. City Of Birmingham <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_66/ Griffin v. Maryland <p>Did ordering five Negro patrons to leave a private amusement park, and arresting them for criminal trespass when they refused, violate their right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment?</p><p>Yes. The Court held that the arresting deputy, despite working as a private park employee at the time, possessed and acted under state authority, imputing responsibility for his actions to Maryland. Therefore, to the extent that he sought to enforce a private policy of racial discrimination, the state of Maryland must be charged with racial discrimination in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_6/ Hamm v. Rock Hill <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1964/1964_2/ Lombard v. Louisiana <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_58/ Mckinnie v. Tennessee <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1964/1964_148/ Parrot v. Tallahassee <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1964/1964_958/ Peterson v. City Of Greenville <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_71/ Robinson v. Florida <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_60/ Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_67/ Wright v. Georgia <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_68/