NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co.
|NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co.|
|Argued March 3, 1982|
Decided July 2, 1982
|Full case name||National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co.|
|Citations||458 U.S. 886 (more)|
|Prior||Supreme Court of Mississippi ruled that entire boycott was unlawful, 393 So.2d 1290 (1980)|
|The nonviolent elements of a boycott are entitled to the protection of the First Amendment.|
|Majority||Stevens, joined by Burger, Brennan, White, Blackmun, Powell, O'Connor|
|Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.|
|U.S. Const. amend. I|
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982), is a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled 8-0 (Marshall did not participate in the decision) that although states have broad power to regulate economic activities, they cannot prohibit peaceful advocacy of a politically-motivated boycott.
In March 1966, black citizens of Port Gibson, Mississippi, and other areas of Claiborne County presented white elected officials with a list of particularized demands for racial equality and racial integration. After not receiving a satisfactory response, at a local National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) meeting at the First Baptist Church, several hundred black persons voted to place a boycott on white merchants in the area.
In February 1967, Port Gibson employed its first black police officer and the boycott was lifted. However, in 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, and a young black man, Roosevelt Jackson was shot and killed by two Port Gibson police officers. On April 19, 1968, the field secretary of the NAACP for Mississippi, Charles Evers, led a march to the Claiborne County courthouse and demanded that the entire Port Jefferson police force be discharged. When the demand was not met, the boycott on the merchants was reimposed. On April 21, Evers made a speech in which he said, "If we catch any of you going into these racist stores, we're going to break your damn neck." During the boycott, individuals known as "Black Hats" or "Deacons" stood outside stores to identify blacks who broke the boycott. The names of those who were identified were published in a black newspaper and the names were read aloud at NAACP meetings. In at least 10 instances, blacks who violated the boycott experienced instances of violence, including shots fired into their homes, bricks thrown through their windshields, and tires on their cars slashed. Five of the incidents occurred in 1966, and were not correlated to Mr. Evers' speech, and the other 5 were undated, and so they were discarded from the court case. This resulted in the court finding no grounds for incitation of violence, noting that " For similar reasons, the judgment against Evers cannot be separately justified, nor can liability be imposed upon him on the basis of speeches that he made, because those speeches did not incite violence or specifically authorize the use of violence" 
On October 31, 1969, 17 of the merchants sued in the Chancery Court of Hinds County, 146 individuals, the NAACP, and Mississippi Action for Progress (MAP) in state court to recover losses caused by the boycott and to enjoin future boycott activity.
A trial began in 1973 and, in 1976, the chancellor found that the black defendants were jointly and severally liable to the plaintiffs based on three separate theories: (1) for a tort of malicious interference with the plaintiff's business; (2) for violation of a Mississippi statute banning secondary boycotts on the theory that the defendants' primary dispute was with the governing authorities of Port Gibson and Claiborne County, and not with the white merchants at whom the boycott was directed; and (3) the court found a violation of Mississippi's antitrust statute, on the ground that the boycott had diverted black patronage from the white merchants to black merchants and to other merchants located out of Claiborne County, and thus had unreasonably limited competition between black and white merchants that had traditionally existed. The court rejected the defendants' defense that their actions were protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The court held that 130 of the defendants were liable for damages to 12 merchants over an 11-year period (1966-1977) in an amount of $1,250,699 plus interest, and put in place a permanent injunction enjoining the defendants from stationing "store watchers" at the merchants' business premises; from "persuading" any person to withhold his patronage from the merchants; from "using demeaning and obscene language to or about any person" because that person continued to patronize the merchants; from "picketing or patroling" the premises of any of the merchants; and from using violence against any person or inflicting damage to any real or personal property.
Decision by the Supreme Court of Mississippi
In December 1980, the Supreme Court of Mississippi upheld the lower court's decision ruling that the boycott was unlawful. Although the court held that the secondary boycott statute was inapplicable because it had not been enacted until "the boycott had been in operation for upward of two years," and the court declined to rely on the Mississippi antitrust statute, noting that the "United States Supreme Court has seen fit to hold boycotts to achieve political ends are not a violation of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 (1970), after which our statute is patterned," the court upheld the imposition of liability, on the basis of the chancellor's common law tort theory.
Opinion of the Court
In a decision by Justice Stevens, the Supreme Court reversed the Supreme Court of Mississippi's decision, holding that the nonviolent elements of the petitioners' activities were protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and holding that the petitioners were not liable in damages for the consequences of their nonviolent, protected activity. This decisions means that "boycotts and related activities to bring about political, social and economic change are political speech, occupying “the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values.”
- NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886 (1982). This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
- "Landmark Civil Rights Case NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co (1982)". www.anti-slapp.org. Mississippi: Public Participation Project. January 1, 2009. Archived from the original on December 12, 2017. Retrieved December 12, 2017.
- The Supreme Court, race, and civil rights, By Abraham L. Davis, Barbara Luck Graham, pg 350
- 458 U.S. at 904-906.
- 458 U.S. at 891-892.
- 458 U.S. at 892.
- 458 U.S. at 893.
- 458 U.S. at 894.
- 458 U.S. at 934.
- Ruebner, Josh (February 12, 2016). "Congress encouraging US states to "combat BDS"". The Electronic Intifada. Archived from the original on December 12, 2017. Retrieved December 12, 2017.
- Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S. 1 (2010).