Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham

Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham
	Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 18, 1968; Decided March 10, 1969
Full case name	Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham
Citations	394 U.S. 147 (more) 89 S. Ct. 935; 22 L. Ed. 2d 162
Holding
	The Court held that (1) even though the actual construction of § 1159 of the Birmingham General City Code was unconstitutional, the judicial construction of the ordinance prohibited only standing or loitering on public property that obstructed free passage, but it was unclear from the record, whether the literal or judicial construction was applied; and (2) the literal construction of § 1159 of the Birmingham General City Code was unconstitutional, and the statutory application revealed that it applied to the enforcement of an officer's order in directing vehicular traffic.
Court membership
	Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas; John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan Jr.; Potter Stewart · Byron White; Abe Fortas · Thurgood Marshall
Case opinions
Majority	Stewart, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Brennan, White, Fortas
Concurrence	Harlan
	Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
	U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 394 U.S. 147 (1969), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Supreme Court struck down a Birmingham, Alabama ordinance that prohibited citizens from holding parades and processions on city streets without first obtaining a permit.

Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 18, 1968 Decided March 10, 1969
Full case name	Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham
Citations	394 U.S. 147 (more) 89 S. Ct. 935; 22 L. Ed. 2d 162
Holding
The Court held that (1) even though the actual construction of § 1159 of the Birmingham General City Code was unconstitutional, the judicial construction of the ordinance prohibited only standing or loitering on public property that obstructed free passage, but it was unclear from the record, whether the literal or judicial construction was applied; and (2) the literal construction of § 1159 of the Birmingham General City Code was unconstitutional, and the statutory application revealed that it applied to the enforcement of an officer's order in directing vehicular traffic.
Court membership
Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan Jr. Potter Stewart · Byron White Abe Fortas · Thurgood Marshall
Case opinions
Majority	Stewart, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Brennan, White, Fortas
Concurrence	Harlan
Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV