national socialist party of america v' village of skokie

1
national socialist party of america v. village
of skokie

• Presentation by Mike Burney, Stephanie Fajuri,
  and Adam Savin
• November 6, 2008

2
The First Amendment

• Congress shall make no law respecting an
  establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
  free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom
  of speech, or of the press or the right of the
  people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
  Government for a redress of grievances.

3
Frank Collin

• Born in 1944 as Frank Cohen
• Left American Nazi Party after assassination of
  George Lincoln Rockwell
• NSPA was barely relevant until Skokie

4
The National Socialist Party of America

• Founded in 1970
• An offshoot of the American Nazi Party
• Headquartered in Chicagos Marquette Park
  neighborhood

5
Collin in Court

• Four concurrent cases
• Collin v. OMalley brought in Federal Court
• Suit to march in Chicago without paying providing
  proof of prohibitive insurance policies
• Skokie v. NSPA brought in State Court
• Suit to enjoin NSPA from marching in Skokie
• Collin v. Smith brought in Federal Court
• Suit challenging constitutionality of public
  display ordinances
• Goldstein v. Collin brought in State Court
• Suit for pseudo-intentional infliction of
  emotional distress

6
Marquette Park

• Eastern European population
• Martin Luther King, Jr. Freedom Marches
• Demonstrations by NSPA and African-American
  Groups

7
Dr. Martin Luthur King, Jr. Movement Marches in
Marquette Park
8
Collin v. OMalley

• Collin and the NSPA wanted to demonstrate against
  the civil rights marchers
• 250,000 insurance bond in order to get a permit
  to demonstrate
• ACLU challenged the constitutionality of the Bond
  Requirement in June 1976

9
Skokie

• Collin contacted all of the Park Districts in
  Chicagos northern suburbs
• Skokie was the only municipality to respond
• Highest per capita Jewish population in America
• 800-1200 Holocaust Survivors

10
Skokies Response Whats Birch Park?

• Board of Commissioners of Skokie Park District
  respond to Collins letter, denying his request.

• Birch Park, where Collin requests to
  demonstrate, does not exist

• Collin requests a permit to march.

11
Frank Collin on Skokie
12
Skokies reaction

• Initial plan Quarantine
• Jews in Skokie did not approve they claimed
• that this was how Hitler
• was able to attain power
• Instead, village council
• filed suit seeking an
• injunction
• Village of Skokie v. National Socialist Party of
  America
• Huge public support for the Village of Skokie,
  driven in part by sympathetic media

13
Village of Skokie v. National Socialist Party of
America

• 4/27/77 - Skokie filed suit
• 4/28/77 - Injunction granted by Judge Wosik
• NSPA enjoined from demonstrating on 5/1/77 or
  thereafter
• 4/29/77 - Collin announces that he will
  demonstrate on 4/30/07
• 4/30/07 Emergency hearing altered the
  injunction to include 4/30

14
Village of Skokie v. NSPA on Appeal

• 4/29/1977 Illinois Appellate Court refuses to
  grant a stay of injunction pending appeal
• 5/25/1977 Illinois Supreme Court denies the
  NSPAs appeal from the Appellate Courts refusal
  to grant a stay
• 6/14/77 United States Supreme Court rules that
  Illinois Supreme Court must either hold a hearing
  on the merits of the case or issue a stay

15
Per Curiam Opinion

• MAJORITY

• DISSENT

Powell
Blackmun
Stevens
Rehnquist
Burger
Marshall
Brennan
Stewart
White
16
Permit Denied

• To prevent the NSPA, Skokie passes 3 ordinances
  pertaining to marches.

• Required 350,000.00 indemnity bond to march.
• Ban on distributing printed material which
  promotes hatred of groups of people.
• Demonstrations in military style uniforms
  prohibited.

• Collin applies for the permit
• With no indemnity bond
• In uniform
• With swastikas

• Denied by Skokie!

17
(No Transcript)
18
Other Interested Parties

• JEWISH GROUPS

• American Jewish Congress
• Jewish Defense League
• Anti-Defamation League
• Synagogue congregations

• RABBI MEIR KAHANE

19
Fear of Counterdemonstration

• The Jewish Defense League
• JDL chairman Irv Rubin - March 16, 1978
• "We are offering 500, that I have in my hand, to
  any member of the community . . . who kills,
  maims or seriously injures a member of the
  American Nazi party.
• Note Rubin was charged with solicitation of
  murder. In 1981, he was acquitted.

20
ACLU Response

• The Board of Directors for the Illinois ACLU
  voted unanimously to continue representing Frank
  Collin.

21
Short Term Effects on the ACLU

• David Goldberger
• Legal Director for the Illinois ACLU
• The his family and the Jewish community did not
  understand how he could represent a Nazi
  traitor
• ACLU director David Hamlin
• His young son disagreed with what he was doing,
  but his Jewish girlfriend was more understanding
• The ACLU as a whole
• Lots of resignations of membership, huge dropoff
  in contributions

22
The ACLUs Principles
23
The ACLUs Principles, continued
24
Another Action, Another Suit

• On May 4th, 1977, the ACLU filed suit on behalf
  of Collin challenging the constitutionality of
  the May 2nd Ordinances
• Collin v. Smith
• The case was not argued until December 2nd, 1977
• The court ruled on the constitutionality of all
  three ordinances on February 24th, 1978

25
Its My Party and Ill March if I Want To

• Collin brought suit in the US District Court of
  Northern Illinois, who found Skokies new permit
  system unconstitutional.
• The 350,000 bond? Unconstitutional
• The ban on distributing hate-promoting materials
  regarding race or heritage? Vague and Overbroad
• Denial for anticipated distribution of the
  hateful materials? Prior Restraint
• Ban on military-style uniforms? Unconstitutional

• With the Collin v. Smith verdict, Collin can
  demonstrate in Skokie, but

26
Collin v. Smithin the US Court of Appeals

• Skokie appeals the verdict to the
• 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
• The case is reviewed en banc.
• Judges all express their distaste for the NSPA
  and what it stands for.
• Ideological tyranny, no matter how worthy its
  motivation, is forbidden as much to appointed
  judges as to elected legislators.

27
7th Circuit Says

• The court determined that
• the First Amendment is king.
• Government cannot restrict expression because of
  a message, idea, subject matter, or content.
• if these civil rights are to remain vital for
  all, they must protect not only those society
  deems acceptable, but also those whose ideas it
  quite justifiably rejects and despises. (Colin)

28
The Exceptions to the First Amendment Argument

• There are certain well-defined and narrowly
  limited classes of speech, the prevention and
  punishment of which have never been thought to
  raise any Constitutional problem. These include
  the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous,
  and the insulting or fighting words.
  (Champlinsky v. New Hampshire)
• Not essential to any exposition of ideas
• Slight social value
• The truth benefit derived is outweighed
• by the interest in order and morality.
• What falls under these exceptions?
• How about in this suit?

29
Upholding the 1st, No Exception

• In finding that Collins planned demonstration
  deserved constitutional protection, Circuit Judge
  Pell found guidance in Street v. NY
• Any shock effect must be attributed to the
  content of the ideas expressed. It is firmly
  settled that under our Constitution the public
  expression of ideas may not be prohibited merely
  because the ideas are themselves offensive to
  some of their hearers

30
The Carroll and Nimrod Bills

• Before 7th had decided Collin v. Smith, Illinois
  State Senators proposed legislation that would
  have had the same effect as the challenged Skokie
  ordinances.
• Senators knew that the laws would likely be
  overturned if challenged, but it would keep the
  NSPA out of for a couple more months.
• The Bills passed in the Senate but were defeated
  in the Illinois House.

31
Out of Skokie

• Collin had repeatedly vowed to demonstrate in
  Skokie
• Date for demonstration was set for June 25, 1978
• Federal District court held that City of Chicago
  may not require a 250,000 insurance bond.
• Collin cancelled the demonstration in Skokie but
  held three demonstrations elsewhere.
• Collin got what he wanted a rally in Marquette
  Park

32
Frank Collin Explains his Retreat
33
What Could Have Changed His Mind?
34
What the Public Took Away
35
Impact of Village of Skokie v. NSPA and Collin v.
Smith

• The court protected what is quite possibly
  considered the least popular speech, and
  preserved broad speech rights for the
  public-at-large.
• The Supreme Court affirmed their commitment to
  procedural fairness, especially when
  constitutional rights are at stake.
• The principles set forth in these cases are still
  well respected principles.
• and

36
Skokie The Movie

• Golden Globe and three-time Emmy nominated,
• DGA and WGA winning tour de force!