This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
The teenager was prosecuted for communicating a biased non-verbal message. | The teenager was prosecuted for communicating a biased non-verbal message. | ||
|procedural_history=At the criminal trial, the teenager argued that the ordinance used to prosecute him violated his [[First Amendment]] rights to speech. | |procedural_history=At the criminal trial, the teenager argued that the ordinance used to prosecute him violated his [[First Amendment]] rights to speech. | ||
|holding=The ordinance of the City of St. Paul, Minnesota is unconstitutional. The City may not prohibit speech solely on the basis of its content. | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/r-a-v-v-city-of-st-paul-minnesota#all-items | |link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/r-a-v-v-city-of-st-paul-minnesota#all-items |
Revision as of 19:34, January 2, 2023
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul | |
Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | June 22, 1992 |
Facts
In 1990, a teenager constructed a cross from a chair in Minnesota. Next, he set the cross ablaze on the lawn of a black family.
The teenager was prosecuted for communicating a biased non-verbal message.Procedural History
At the criminal trial, the teenager argued that the ordinance used to prosecute him violated his First Amendment rights to speech.
Holding
The ordinance of the City of St. Paul, Minnesota is unconstitutional. The City may not prohibit speech solely on the basis of its content.