Musser v. Utah

Background

People in Utah were convicted for conspiring "to commit acts injurious to public morals" after allegedly counseling, advising, and promoting polygamous or plural marriage. The state trial court convicted them and the Utah Supreme Court upheld those convictions over the defendants’ constitutional objections.

Reasoning

On review the Justices focused on whether the Utah statute (§103-11-1) is so vague and broad that it fails to give fair notice of what conduct is illegal. The majority emphasized that the quoted phrase is part of a larger body of state law and that Utah courts should first decide how the statute is to be interpreted in context and whether defendants waived the point. Because state law questions were unresolved, the Court vacated the Utah judgment and remanded the case for the state court to clarify the law.

Real world impact

The decision does not finally rule on whether advocacy about polygamy is protected speech or whether the statute is unconstitutional. Instead it returns the matter to Utah’s highest court to set the proper legal limits. Until the state court acts, prosecutions under broadly worded "injurious to public morals" language remain uncertain for people who speak or organize about controversial practices.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissenting opinion argued the convictions should be reversed now because, as the Utah court construed the law, it criminalized advocacy and failed to distinguish protected speech from immediate incitement to illegal acts, making the convictions unconstitutional.