National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
National Socialist Party v. Skokie
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Decided June 14, 1977
Full case name National Socialist Party of America et al. v. Village of Skokie
Docket nos. 76-1786
Citations 432 U.S. 43 (more)
97 S. Ct. 2205; 53 L. Ed. 2d 96; 1977 U.S. LEXIS 113; 2 Media L. Rep. 1993
Holding
If a state seeks to impose an injunction in violation of First Amendment rights, it must provide strict procedural safeguards, including immediate appellate review. Absent such review, a stay must be granted.
Court membership
Case opinions
Per curiam.
Concur/dissent White
Dissent Rehnquist, joined by Burger, Stewart
Laws applied
First Amendment of the United States Constitution

National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 (1977) (also known as Smith v. Collin; sometimes referred to as the Skokie Affair), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with freedom of assembly.

Purpose of the Case[edit]

In 1977 Frank Collin, the leader of National Socialist Party of America, announced the party's intention to march through Skokie, Illinois. In the predominately Jewish community, one in six residents was a Holocaust survivor. Originally, the NSPA had planned a political rally in Marquette Park in Chicago; however the Chicago authorities thwarted these plans, first, by requiring the NSPA to post a public-safety-insurance bond, then, by banning all political demonstrations in Marquette Park.

On behalf of the NSPA, the ACLU challenged the injunction issued by the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois that prohibited marchers at the proposed Skokie rally from wearing Nazi uniforms or displaying swastikas. The ACLU was represented by civil rights attorney Burton Joseph.[1][2] The challengers argued that the injunction violated the First Amendment rights of the marchers to express themselves.

Prior history[edit]

Both the Illinois Appellate Court and the Illinois Supreme Court refused to stay the injunction. The case was sent to the Supreme Court of the United States.[3]

On June 14, 1977, the Supreme Court ordered Illinois to hold a hearing on their ruling against the National Socialist Party of America, emphasizing that "[i]f a State seeks to impose a restraint [on First Amendment rights], it must provide strict procedural safeguards, including immediate appellate review... Absent such review, the State must instead allow a stay. The order of the Illinois Supreme Court constituted a denial of that right."[4] On remand, the Illinois Appellate Court eliminated the injunction against everything but the swastika. The Illinois Supreme Court heard the case again, focusing on the First Amendment implications of display of the swastika. Skokie attorneys argued that for Holocaust survivors, seeing the swastika was like being physically attacked.

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the use of the swastika is a symbolic form of free speech entitled to First Amendment protections and determined that the swastika itself did not constitute "fighting words." Its ruling allowed the National Socialist Party of America to march.[5]

Effect of the decision[edit]

In the summer of 1978, in response to the Supreme Court's decision, some Holocaust survivors set up a museum on the Main Street of Skokie to commemorate those who had died in the concentration camps. Ultimately the NSPA failed to carry through its march in Skokie. (Gaining permission in Chicago, they marched there instead).

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Further reading[edit]

  • Bollinger, Lee C.; Neier, Aryeh (1982). "The Skokie Legacy: Reflections on an 'Easy Case' and Free Speech Theory". Michigan Law Review 80 (4): 617–33. doi:10.2307/1288226. JSTOR 1288226. 
  • Barnum, David G. (1982). "Decision Making in A Constitutional Democracy: Policy Formation in the Skokie Free Speech Controversy". The Journal of Politics 44 (2): 480–508. doi:10.2307/2130597. 
  • Schauer, Frederick (2005). "The Wily Agitator and the American Free Speech Tradition". Stanford Law Review 57 (6): 2157–70. JSTOR 40040243. 

External links[edit]