Fowler v. Rhode Island
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
' | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States | ||||||||||
Argued Feb. 3, 1953 Decided Mar. 9, 1953 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Holding | ||||||||||
A municipal ordinance which is so construed and applied as to penalize a minister of Jehovah's Witnesses for preaching at a peaceful religious meeting in a public park, although other religious groups could conduct religious services there with impunity, violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Federal Constitution. | ||||||||||
Court membership | ||||||||||
Case opinions | ||||||||||
Majority by: Douglas Concurrence by: =Frankfurter,Jackson |
||||||||||
Laws applied | ||||||||||
First Amendment,Fourteenth Amendment |
Fowler v. Rhode Island, 345 U.S. 67 (1953),[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a municipal ordinance which was used to penalize a minister of Jehovah's Witnesses for preaching at a peaceful religious meeting in a public park, although other religious groups could conduct religious services there with impunity, violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
Contents |
[edit] Facts of the case
The City of Pawtucket, Rhode Island, had an ordinance which reads as follows:
- "SEC. 11. No person shall address any political or religious meeting in any public park; but this section shall not be construed to prohibit any political or religious club or society from visiting any public park in a body, provided that no public address shall be made under the auspices of such club or society in such park."
Jehovah's Witnesses assembled in Slater Park of Pawtucket for a meeting which at the trial was conceded to be religious in character. About 400 people attended, 150 being Jehovah's Witnesses. Fowler, a Jehovah's Witness minister, was invited to give a talk before the Pawtucket congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. Fowler accepted the invitation and addressed the meeting in the park over two loud-speakers. It was a quiet, orderly meeting with no disturbances or breaches of the peace whatsoever.
Fowler had been talking only a few minutes when he was arrested by the police and charged with violating the ordinance set forth above. He was tried and found guilty over objections that the ordinance as so construed and applied violated the First and the Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. He was fined $5.
[edit] Prior history
Fowler's conviction was affirmed by the Rhode Island Supreme Court. 80 R.I., 91 A. 2d 27. Also see Fowler v. State, 79 R. I. 16, 83 A. 2d 67, an earlier opinion answering certified questions and holding the ordinance valid.
[edit] Decision of the Court
Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Dissenting opinions
Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Effects of the decision
Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Critical response
Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Subsequent history
Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] References
- ^ v. Rhode Island 67 U.S. Fowler v. Rhode Island Full text of the opinion courtesy of Findlaw.com.