This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: reiterated that the "fundamental rights of the Bill of Rights are not absolute", and as in Saia v. New York , "the hours and place of public discussion can be controlled." Trenton was granted the authority to prevent "disturbing noises" and "protect the wellbeing and tranquility of a community." Since the ordinance furthered Trenton's interest in maintaining "the quiet and tranquility so desirable for city dwellers," the ordinance did not violate the Free Speech Clause. Justices Robert H. Jackson and Felix Frankfurter each concurred separately. Notes: Restrictions on Free Speech 1. Good Reason for making restrictions – public health, peace, property values- if not a good reason then govt. is being arbitrary or capricious. 2. Appropriate – not overbroad. - 3. Not Discriminating – even handed. Under-inclusive, 4. Alternative Method available. Time, place and manner cannot discriminate, alternate must be available....
View Full Document
- Spring '10
- Supreme Court of the United States, First Amendment to the United States Constitution, New Jersey, Trenton, United States Bill of Rights