Bach v. Ballard

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “[w]hen the Government makes speech a crime, the judges on appeal must use an exacting ruler.”
• holding “[a]ppellant’s use of coarse language was clearly intended to express his rage, not any sexual desire or moral dissolution.”
• holding profanity did not constitute indecent language where it was intended to express rage rather than sexual desire
• rejecting a “per se” test for indecent language in favor of one evaluating the circumstances surrounding the communication
• rejecting a “per se” test for indecent language in favor of one evaluating the circumstances surrounding the communication

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).