Greer v. Spock case brief summary
424 U.S. 828 (1976)
CASE FACTS
The candidates informed the commander of their intention to enter the military base for the purpose of distributing campaign literature and holding a political meeting. The commander rejected their request, relying on the base's regulations governing political campaigning and the distribution of literature. The candidates filed an action seeking to enjoin the enforcement of the regulations, arguing that they violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution. The district court issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the commander from interfering with the candidates' activities and the court of appeals affirmed.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The Court reversed the appellate court's decision affirming the district court's decision to issue a permanent injunction.
424 U.S. 828 (1976)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Respondent candidates filed an action
against petitioner commander to enjoin enforcement of a military
base's regulations governing political campaigning and the
distribution of literature. The United States District Court for the
District of New Jersey issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the
commander from interfering, and the United States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit affirmed. The commander filed for writ of
certiorari.CASE FACTS
The candidates informed the commander of their intention to enter the military base for the purpose of distributing campaign literature and holding a political meeting. The commander rejected their request, relying on the base's regulations governing political campaigning and the distribution of literature. The candidates filed an action seeking to enjoin the enforcement of the regulations, arguing that they violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution. The district court issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the commander from interfering with the candidates' activities and the court of appeals affirmed.
DISCUSSION
- The court granted the commander's petition for writ of certiorari, holding that the candidates had no generalized constitutional right to make political speeches or distribute leaflets at the military base.
- Also, the regulations were not constitutionally invalid on their face.
- Further, the regulations were not unconstitutionally applied because the commander had not discriminated among candidates based upon their political views because the regulations had been evenhandedly applied to all persons interested in speaking or distributing literature on the base.
CONCLUSION
The Court reversed the appellate court's decision affirming the district court's decision to issue a permanent injunction.
No comments:
Post a Comment