Freedom Of Assembly

181 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Hobson v. Wilson
  737 F.2d 1· D.C. Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 237×
  The court held that the District of Columbia and its employees can be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3), and that certain claims against FBI defendants were barred by the statute of limitations, while others against MPD defendants and the District lacked sufficient evidence.
• Norton v. McSHANE
  332 F.2d 855· 5th Cir.· 1964-06-01 ·cited 139×
  The dissenting opinion argues that the majority erred in granting immunity to federal officials accused of violating fundamental constitutional rights. It asserts that official immunity does not shield acts that are unlawful, willful, and malicious denials of constitutional right
• Honorable Ronald v. Dellums
  566 F.2d 167· D.C. Cir.· 1977-08-04 ·cited 133×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority opinion erred by failing to consider the context of widespread, violent protests preceding the incident in question, which would have supported police immunity.
• Bailey v. Richardson
  182 F.2d 46· D.C. Cir.· 1950-03-22 ·cited 114×
  The court held that dismissal for disloyalty based on unsworn, anonymous reports violates due process and constitutional rights to free speech and association.
• Nesmith v. Alford
  318 F.2d 110· 5th Cir.· 1963-05-30 ·cited 112×
  The court held that the initial arrest and imprisonment of the plaintiffs was unlawful as a matter of law, and that the admission of evidence of prior racial strife was erroneous, necessitating a retrial on certain claims.
• Hi Holdridge v. United States
  282 F.2d 302· 8th Cir.· 1960-08-31 ·cited 100×
  The court held that the second paragraph of 18 U.S.C. § 1382, prohibiting re-entry after removal, does not require proof of criminal intent and that the government had established exclusive possession of the property.
• Wolin v. Port OF NEW York Auth.
  392 F.2d 83· 2d Cir.· 1968-03-01 ·cited 97×
  The Port Authority may not absolutely prohibit political expression in its bus terminal, as the terminal is a public forum. Peaceful activities like distributing leaflets, carrying placards, and engaging in discussions are protected by the First Amendment and can only be restrict
• Little v. Walker
  552 F.2d 193· 7th Cir.· 1977-03-25 ·cited 79×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the claim for damages, as the plaintiff's allegations, if true, demonstrated a violation of clearly established constitutional rights and that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity.
• State v. J.P.
  907 So. 2d 1101· Fla.· 2004-11-18 ·cited 77×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that juvenile curfew ordinances enacted by Tampa and Pinellas Park are unconstitutional because they burden fundamental rights and fail strict scrutiny review. The ordinances impermissibly restrict minors' rights to privacy and freedom of movement t
• A Quaker Action Grp. v. Hickel
  421 F.2d 1111· D.C. Cir.· 1969-06-24 ·cited 77×
  The court held that while the government has a paramount interest in presidential safety, it must provide factual support for claims that demonstrations threaten it, rather than relying on mere assertion. The preliminary injunction was modified to require advance notice of demons
• United States v. Buttorff
  572 F.2d 619· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-28 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for aiding and abetting the filing of false tax withholding forms, and that the defendants' speech, which went beyond mere advocacy and explained evasion methods, was not protected by the First Amendment.
• Nat'l Student Ass'n, Inc. v. Hershey
  412 F.2d 1103· D.C. Cir.· 1969-06-06 ·cited 76×
  The court held that Section 10(b)(3) of the Military Selective Service Act does not bar a suit challenging the legality of administrative regulations and official policy, and that a justiciable controversy exists regarding the portion of the Hershey directive authorizing reclassi
• Action v. Rowland E. Gannon
  450 F.2d 1227· 8th Cir.· 1971-11-03 ·cited 74×
• Esteban v. Cent. Mo. State Coll.
  415 F.2d 1077· 8th Cir.· 1969-08-28 ·cited 74×
  A federal court's review of student discipline under the Civil Rights Act requires a de novo trial on the merits of federal rights denial, not an "substantial evidence" review of the school's proceedings.
• Erna Yaffe and James Hornsby v. Powers
  454 F.2d 1362· 1st Cir.· 1972-01-26 ·cited 72×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying class action status based on misapplication of Rule 23 criteria, and the order is appealable.
• Dresner v. City OF Tallahassee
  164 So. 2d 208· Fla.· 1964-05-22 ·cited 72×
  The U.S. Supreme Court certified questions to the Florida Supreme Court regarding whether lower Florida courts had jurisdiction to review municipal convictions on federal constitutional grounds. The court held that the Florida District Court of Appeal had jurisdiction via common
• Brewer v. Hoxie Sch. Dist. NO. 46 OF Lawrence Cnty.
  238 F.2d 91· 8th Cir.· 1956-10-25 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the federal district court had jurisdiction to issue an injunction against individuals and organizations conspiring to obstruct the desegregation of public schools, as the action arose under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
• Frank Collin & the Nat'l Socialist Party of Am. v. Smith
  578 F.2d 1197· 7th Cir.· 1978-05-22 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the Village of Skokie's ordinances prohibiting the dissemination of materials inciting hatred and prohibiting demonstrations by political parties in uniform were unconstitutional as applied to the National Socialist Party of America's planned demonstration.
• Gluck v. State
  62 So. 2d 71· Fla.· 1952-12-22 ·cited 46×
  The appellant was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape after being charged with rape. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, finding that the trial was fundamentally unfair due to prosecutorial misconduct, including introduction of evidence of prior similar
• Hague v. Comm. for Indus. Org.
  101 F.2d 774· 3d Cir.· 1939-01-26 ·cited 44×
  The dissenting judge argued that the ordinance requiring permits for public assemblies was constitutional and that the Director of Public Safety did not abuse his discretion in refusing a permit, citing the need to prevent riots and disorderly assemblages. The judge also contende
• Int'l Union v. United States (two cases)
  177 F.2d 29· D.C. Cir.· 1949-06-06 ·cited 40×
  Individuals and unions must obey temporary court orders to maintain the status quo, even if the underlying statute is later found unconstitutional, and can be held in criminal contempt for willful disobedience.
• GAY Students Org. OF the Univ. OF NEW Hampshire v. Bonner
  509 F.2d 652· 1st Cir.· 1974-12-30 ·cited 36×
  The court held that restricting a student organization's social functions on campus impermissibly abridged its members' First Amendment rights of association, even if the organization was recognized and other activities were permitted.
• Jordan v. Hutcheson
  323 F.2d 597· 4th Cir.· 1963-09-17 ·cited 34×
  A federal court has the power to enjoin state legislative committee actions that violate citizens' constitutional rights, even if the committee acts under color of state law.
• Oleta O'Connor Yates v. United States
  225 F.2d 146· 9th Cir.· 1955-03-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the indictment, charging a standard conspiracy under 18 U.S.C.A. § 371 with specific intent and overt acts, was sufficient and timely, distinguishing it from prior cases like Dennis v. United States.
• United States v. Justina Lowe
  654 F.2d 562· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-24 ·cited 33×
  The court held that a probation restriction prohibiting approaching a submarine base infringes on fundamental constitutional rights of freedom of speech and assembly.
• Hall Davis v. Francois
  395 F.2d 730· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-28 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the Port Allen picketing ordinance is unconstitutional on its face because it is overbroad and unduly restricts protected First Amendment rights.
• A Quaker Action Grp. v. Rogers C. B. Morton
  460 F.2d 854· D.C. Cir.· 1971-10-21 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment, as significant First Amendment issues regarding the necessity and restrictiveness of numerical limitations on demonstrations require a trial.
• Cousins v. Wigoda
  463 F.2d 603· 7th Cir.· 1972-06-29 ·cited 31×
  The court held that vacating a preliminary injunction against a state court action seeking to suppress First Amendment rights was an abuse of discretion.
• Toney v. Reagan
  467 F.2d 953· 9th Cir.· 1972-09-08 ·cited 30×
  The court held that probationary professors alleging First Amendment violations for non-renewal must exhaust prospective state administrative remedies if those remedies are fair and adequate, and that the California State College System's grievance procedure met this standard.
• Bayless v. Martine
  430 F.2d 873· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the students' suspensions were valid because they violated lawful directions from the Dean of Students regarding the time and place of their demonstration.
• Lynch v. Johnson
  420 F.2d 818· 6th Cir.· 1970-01-08 ·cited 30×
  A county judge presiding over a legislative/administrative Fiscal Court is not entitled to judicial immunity for actions taken outside the scope of legitimate legislative activity, even if the statute grants contempt power.
• Sellers v. The Regents OF the Univ. OF Cal.
  432 F.2d 493· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-17 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the complaint, refusing to convene a three-judge court, as there was no genuine threat of irreparable harm or chilling effect on First Amendment rights to warrant injunctive relief.
• Central Florida Nuclear Freeze Campaign and Bruce Gagnon v. Walsh
  774 F.2d 1515· 11th Cir.· 1985-11-04 ·cited 28×
  The ordinance is facially unconstitutional because it fails to provide for prompt judicial review of permit denials, a necessary safeguard for prior restraints on speech.
• Dream Defenders v. Governor of the State of Fla.
  57 F.4th 879· 11th Cir.· 2023-01-10 ·cited 26×
  The Eleventh Circuit certified a question about the interpretation of Florida's riot statute to the Florida Supreme Court, finding it appropriate to allow the state court to interpret the law before ruling on its constitutionality.
• Nat'l Ass'n FOR the Advancement OF Colored People v. Thompson
  357 F.2d 831· 5th Cir.· 1966-03-08 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying injunctive relief and dismissing the complaint, finding that state and local officials had engaged in a pattern of harassment and unjustified arrests to suppress civil rights protests, and that the denial of corporate domest
• Johnson v. The City OF Opelousas
  658 F.2d 1065· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-13 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Opelousas juvenile curfew ordinance is unconstitutionally overbroad because it sweeps within its ambit innocent activities protected by minors' constitutional rights, and less drastic means exist to achieve the city's goals. The court reversed the district
• Hastings v. Bonner
  578 F.2d 136· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-14 ·cited 24×
• Petersen v. Talisman Sugar Corp.
  478 F.2d 73· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the company's labor camp, functioning as a company town, is subject to First Amendment restraints, requiring reasonable access for the public to communicate with workers, and that the plaintiffs have standing to assert their own rights to disseminate informati
• Kuebler v. Cleveland Lithographers & Photoengravers Union Local 24-P
  473 F.2d 359· 6th Cir.· 1973-02-06 ·cited 24×
  The Union violated the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act by disciplining a member for attending a meeting to discuss strike negotiations, as this infringed upon his rights to free speech and assembly.
• Sweet v. Childs
  507 F.2d 675· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-31 ·cited 23×
  The court should have expunged ten-day suspensions from student records because punishment was meted out without notice of consequences.
• Nat'l Socialist White People's Party v. Ringers
  473 F.2d 1010· 4th Cir.· 1973-02-05 ·cited 22×
  The state may deny the use of public facilities to an organization that excludes Black people from membership, as this does not violate the First or Fourteenth Amendments.
• Captain Douglas Bruce McGAW v. Colonel A. Allen Farrow
  472 F.2d 952· 4th Cir.· 1973-01-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of federal question jurisdiction and failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
• Collin v. Chicago Park Dist.
  460 F.2d 746· 7th Cir.· 1972-04-27 ·cited 22×
• Mrs. Mary Ellen Pritchard v. Downie
  326 F.2d 323· 8th Cir.· 1964-01-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the plaintiffs' arrests were justified by probable cause and their conduct constituted an unlawful assembly, thus their civil rights claims were properly dismissed.
• Moishe Meyer Rosen v. The Port OF Portland
  641 F.2d 1243· 9th Cir.· 1981-03-05 ·cited 21×
  The court held that an airport ordinance requiring advance notice and identification for demonstrations is a valid restriction on First Amendment rights.
• Wyman Westberry v. Gilman Paper Co.
  507 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-22 ·cited 21×
• Trotman v. Bd. OF Trs. OF Lincoln Univ. of the Commonwealth Sys. of Higher Educ.
  635 F.2d 216· 3d Cir.· 1980-11-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the faculty's claims, as their criticism of university policy constituted protected speech and the university's retaliatory actions and speech restrictions were not justified by good faith or the faculty's persistence.
• Jenkins v. La. State Bd. OF Educ.
  506 F.2d 992· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-20 ·cited 20×
  Students who engage in peaceable assembly and speech advocating a boycott, without urging violence or disruption, are protected by the First Amendment, even if others later commit violent acts.
• The Cong. OF Racial Equal. v. Douglas
  318 F.2d 95· 5th Cir.· 1963-05-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction was an unconstitutional abridgement of First Amendment rights and an abuse of discretion because there was no evidence that CORE intended to foment violence or that a clear and present danger existed.
• Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Civiletti
  503 F. Supp. 442· S.D. Fla.· 1980-07-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court has jurisdiction to review claims alleging procedural irregularities in the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) processing of asylum claims, distinguishing these from direct challenges to final deportation orders which are exclusi