Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

United States Et Al. v. Grace Et Al.

• 1982 • 461 U.S. 171 • Burger Court
In the United States v. Grace et al., 1982, the Supreme Court ruled that a federal statute prohibiting demonstrations on Supreme Court grounds was unconstitutional as applied to sidewalks surrounding the court building. The case began when two individuals were charged with violating this law by distributing leaflets on public sidewalks around the court. They challenged their convictions, arguing that these restrictions violated their First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly. The...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Burger Court
Term: 1982
Docket: 81-1863
461 U.S. 171
103 S. Ct. 1702
75 L. Ed. 2d 736
1983 U.S. LEXIS 154
Argued: Jan 18, 1983

United States Et Al. v. Grace Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the United States v. Grace et al., 1982, the Supreme Court ruled that a federal statute prohibiting demonstrations on Supreme Court grounds was unconstitutional as applied to sidewalks surrounding the court building. The case began when two individuals were charged with violating this law by distributing leaflets on public sidewalks around the court. They challenged their convictions, arguing that these restrictions violated their First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly. The Supreme Court agreed with them in part, ruling that while Congress had legitimate interests in preserving decorum at the court and preventing interference with its operations, these interests did not justify an absolute ban on all expressive activity on adjacent public sidewalks - traditional public forums for communication and protest. However, it upheld restrictions within areas like courtyards or steps leading directly to courthouse entrances where government interest might be stronger. This decision underscored how even significant governmental interests must be balanced against constitutional protections of freedom of expression in determining permissible limits of protest activities near key national institutions.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Grace, Justice Thurgood Marshall argued that the Supreme Court's decision to strike down a federal law prohibiting demonstrations on Supreme Court grounds was misguided. He contended that such restrictions were necessary to maintain decorum and order in an institution as important as the Supreme Court. Furthermore, he believed that these regulations did not infringe upon First Amendment rights because they only applied to specific types of expressive conduct within certain areas of government property - namely those which could potentially disrupt court proceedings or compromise its dignity and respectability. In his view, this case was about balancing free speech rights with maintaining appropriate behavior at a significant national institution rather than outright censorship or suppression of expression.

Opinion written by Justice BRWhite
Decided: Apr 20, 1983
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms