In the case of DeStefano v. Woods, Sheriff (1967), the U.S Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a state law that allowed for a change in venue at the discretion of a trial judge violated an accused person's constitutional right to be tried by an impartial jury from their local community. The petitioner, DeStefano, had been convicted of murder and his trial was moved from Cook County to Peoria County due to extensive pretrial publicity which could have influenced potential jurors' opinions about him. He argued this move infringed upon his Sixth Amendment rights as he believed it would be more difficult for him to get a fair trial outside his home county where people were less likely familiar with him or his circumstances. The Supreme Court disagreed with DeStefano's argument and upheld the constitutionality of Illinois' discretionary venue transfer statute under review. They concluded that there is no absolute constitutional requirement mandating trials must always take place in locality where crime occurred; rather what matters most is ensuring defendant receives fair trial by impartial jury free from outside influences - something they felt could still happen even if venue changed.

In the dissenting opinion for Destefano v. Woods, Sheriff (1967), Justice William O. Douglas argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting picketing near courthouses was an infringement on First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly. He contended that peaceful protest should be protected even if it takes place in close proximity to a courthouse, as long as it does not obstruct access or disrupt proceedings within the court itself. Furthermore, he expressed concern over potential misuse of such laws by authorities seeking to suppress unpopular views or protests against perceived injustices within the judicial system itself. The justice also emphasized his belief that courts should serve as forums for public debate and criticism rather than being shielded from them.