June, 7 1971:
1. Facts of Case Cohen v. California 403 (1971)
This case came about when Paul Robert Cohen 19 was arrested after he wore a jacket with the words “Fuck the Draft” expressing his opinion of the draft for the Vietnam war while exiting out of a Los Angeles court room on April 26, 1968.
4. Analysis
After the retrial the court decided that by displaying a four letter word he was not in fact inciting negative behavior with the public. The court ruled declared that a court could not censor speech in order to peace. The courts relied on decisions made with Stromberg v. California and the United States v. O’Brien saying that he wanted to be expressive conveying only his opinion making notion to incite a disturbance of any sort.
5. Conclusion
“The defendant did not engage in, nor threaten to engage in, nor did anyone as the result of his conduct” The court reversed the Court of Appeals decision by 5-4
Source: The First Amendment Rocks!
Image: Dr. Peter L. Steinberg when he was 21 years-old sat next to the poster Fuck the Draft, Dirty Linen Corporation, NY, late 60s;
1. Facts of Case Cohen v. California 403 (1971)
This case came about when Paul Robert Cohen 19 was arrested after he wore a jacket with the words “Fuck the Draft” expressing his opinion of the draft for the Vietnam war while exiting out of a Los Angeles court room on April 26, 1968.
2. Legal Issue
The legal issues at hand was that even though Cohen did not wear the jacket while in the court room he still in fact wore it while existing the Los Angeles court room which put him in violation of section 415 of the California Penal Code, which prohibited maliciously and willfully disturbing the peace or quiet of any neighborhood or person by offensive conduct. The case was brought before the courts to determine if his actions fell within his right to the 1st and 14th amendment or was he in fact in violation of the California Penal code3. Rule of Law
While the Court of Appeal thought that Cohen was in violation of the Penal code sentencing him to thirty days of imprisonment.4. Analysis
After the retrial the court decided that by displaying a four letter word he was not in fact inciting negative behavior with the public. The court ruled declared that a court could not censor speech in order to peace. The courts relied on decisions made with Stromberg v. California and the United States v. O’Brien saying that he wanted to be expressive conveying only his opinion making notion to incite a disturbance of any sort.
5. Conclusion
“The defendant did not engage in, nor threaten to engage in, nor did anyone as the result of his conduct” The court reversed the Court of Appeals decision by 5-4
Source: The First Amendment Rocks!
Image: Dr. Peter L. Steinberg when he was 21 years-old sat next to the poster Fuck the Draft, Dirty Linen Corporation, NY, late 60s;
