Collin v. Smith

578 F.2d 1197 (7th Cir. 1978)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The National Socialist Party of America (NSPA)(P) is a political group described by its leader, Frank Collin (P) as a Nazi party. P believes that black persons are biologically inferior to white persons, and should be expatriated to Africa as soon as possible; that American Jews have 'inordinate . . . political and financial power' in the world and are 'in the forefront of the international Communist revolution.' NSPA members affect a uniform reminiscent of those worn by members of the German Nazi Party during the Third Reich and display a swastika thereon, and on a red, white, and black flag they frequently carry. The Village of Skokie (D), is a suburb north of Chicago. It has a large Jewish population, including as many as several thousand survivors of the Nazi holocaust in Europe before and during World War II. P announced plans to march in front of the Village Hall in Skokie on May 1, 1977. D obtained a preliminary injunction against the demonstration. The United States Supreme Court ordered a stay. The injunction was eventually reversed. D then enacted three ordinances to prohibit demonstrations such as the one Ps had threatened. This lawsuit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against enforcement of the ordinances. One of the prerequisites for a permit is a finding by D that the assembly will not portray criminality, depravity or lack of virtue in, or incite violence, hatred, abuse or hostility toward a person or group of persons by reason of reference to religious, racial, ethnic, national or regional affiliation. Another ordinance prohibits the dissemination of any materials within the Village of Skokie which promotes and incites hatred against persons by reason of their race, national origin, or religion, and is intended to do so. Ps applied for a permit to march on July 4, 1977, which was denied on the ground the application disclosed an intention to violate the ordinances. The permit application stated that the march would last about a half hour, and would involve 30 to 50 demonstrators wearing uniforms including swastikas and carrying a party banner with a swastika and placards with statements thereon such as 'White Free Speech,' 'Free Speech for the White Man,' and 'Free Speech for White America.' A single file sidewalk march that would not disrupt traffic was proposed, without speeches or the distribution of handbills or literature. The district court granted relief to P. The insurance requirements were invalidated as insuperable obstacles to free speech, and §§ 27-56(c) & (i) (the latter when used to deny permits on the basis of anticipated violations of 995 or 996) were adjudged impermissible prior restraints. Ordinance 995 was determined to be fatally vague and overbroad, and 996 was invalidated as overbroad and patently unjustified. D appealed.