Cox v. Louisiana

Background

A protest leader (Cox) led about 2,000 demonstrators who marched to a courthouse in Baton Rouge to protest the arrest of 23 students. They assembled on the opposite sidewalk, about 101 feet from the courthouse steps. Local officials, including the police chief and sheriff, told the group they could demonstrate there for a short time but later ordered them to disperse; Cox was arrested and convicted under a Louisiana law banning picketing or parading in or near courthouses.

Reasoning

The Court first held the Louisiana statute was valid on its face because a state may regulate conduct — like picketing and parading near a courthouse — that threatens the fairness and order of judicial proceedings. But the Court reversed Cox’s conviction on the specific facts. The record showed top police officials effectively permitted the demonstration at that location and the later dispersal order relied on an invalid reason. Relying on that official permission, the Court found it would be unfair and a violation of due process to convict Cox.

Real world impact

States may keep laws banning picketing near courthouses, but officials cannot later punish people who reasonably relied on police direction allowing a particular location. Protesters who receive clear on-the-spot permission may have a defense against conviction. The decision stresses officials must apply crowd and time limits clearly.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices Black and Clark would have reached different results: Black would have affirmed the courthouse-picketing conviction; Clark strongly dissented from reversing the conviction; Justice White concurred in part and dissented in part.