Lovell v. Davis was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a state law that prohibited the distribution of religious literature without a license was constitutional. The case was brought by a woman named Mary Lovell, who was arrested for distributing religious literature without a license in the state of Tennessee. The Supreme Court held that the Tennessee law was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion. The Court reasoned that the law was overly broad and did not serve a legitimate governmental purpose. Furthermore, the Court held that the law was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. The Court's decision in Lovell v. Davis was significant because it established that the government cannot restrict the free exercise of religion or the right to free speech without a compelling state interest. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving the First Amendment.

In the case of Lovell v. Davis, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a state law that prohibited individuals from distributing religious literature without first obtaining a license violated an individual's First Amendment rights. The majority opinion held that such laws did not violate any constitutional protections and were therefore valid. Justice Field dissented, arguing that this type of licensing requirement constituted prior restraint on speech and thus infringed upon an individual's right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by the First Amendment. He argued further that while states may have some power to regulate certain types of speech in order to protect public safety or morals, they cannot impose restrictions which are so broad as to prevent people from exercising their fundamental right to free expression altogether.