M. I. C., LTD., Et Al. v. BEDFORD TOWNSHIP
Headline: Drive-in theater owners win a temporary stay blocking a local court’s ban on allegedly obscene films, allowing the theater to show films while Michigan appellate courts consider the case.
Holding: A Justice granted a temporary stay of a state trial court’s injunction banning allegedly obscene films because the lack of prompt appellate review would leave the ban in place for several months.
- Allows the theater to show films while the appeal is decided.
- Requires prompt appellate review or a stay when speech is restrained.
- Prevents preliminary bans from remaining in effect for months without review.
Summary
Background
The owners and operator of the West Point Auto Theatre in Bedford Township, Michigan, were sued by the Township after showing two films the Township called obscene. The trial court issued a preliminary injunction on May 23, 1983, barring any films containing explicit sexual intercourse or other carnal acts until a full trial or further order. The theater owners appealed; the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court declined to stay the injunction while the appeal proceeded.
Reasoning
A Justice of the Supreme Court reviewed the request for a stay because the owners said the delay in appellate review could be many months. The Justice noted that when a State imposes a prior ban on expression, it must provide prompt appellate review or allow a stay so speech is not silenced for a long time. The Justice relied on earlier decisions saying a court cannot leave a broad ban in place without quick review, and concluded that the State’s refusal to provide immediate review effectively left the restraint in force during the appeal.
Real world impact
Because of that reasoning, the Justice granted a stay of the trial court’s preliminary ban while the Michigan courts decide the appeal. Practically, the theater may show films that the trial court had banned until the state courts reach a final decision. The ruling also reinforces that state courts must act promptly or temporary bans on expression should be stayed.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?