Search results
The District Court held that the ordinance was not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad on its face, but the Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the ordinance was substantially overbroad, since its literal wording punished and might deter a significant range of protected speech. Held: 1.
A case brief of a Supreme Court decision that struck down a Houston ordinance prohibiting verbal challenges to police officers as unconstitutional. The case explains the rule of law, the facts, the issue, the holding, and the dissent and concurrence of the case.
The case involved a challenge to a municipal ordinance that prohibited verbal interruptions of police officers. The Court held that the ordinance was unconstitutionally overbroad and invalid under the First Amendment.
Jan 1, 2009 · In City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987), the Supreme Court found a city ordinance prohibiting verbal abuse of police officers to be unconstitutionally overbroad and a criminalization of protected speech.
Raymond Hill (defendant) was arrested and charged with violating an ordinance of the City of Houston (plaintiff) that prohibited any conduct that interrupts a police officer in the execution of his duties.
Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987) City of Houston, Texas v. Hill. No. 86-243. Argued March 23, 1987. Decided June 15, 1987. 482 U.S. 451. Syllabus. Upon shouting at police in an attempt to divert their attention from his friend during a confrontation, appellee was arrested for "willfully . . . interrupt [ing] a city policeman . . . by verbal challenge ...
The case involved a challenge to a Houston ordinance that prohibited verbal interruptions of police officers. The Court held that the ordinance was unconstitutionally overbroad and invalid under the First Amendment.
