Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 6/25/1973

Broadrick v. Oklahoma

Citations

  • 413 U.S. 601
  • 93 S. Ct. 2908
  • 37 L. Ed. 2d 830
  • 1973 U.S. LEXIS 34

About this case

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1973 United States Supreme Court case

Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601 (1973), is a United States Supreme Court decision upholding an Oklahoma statute which prohibited state employees from engaging in partisan political activities. Broadrick is often cited to enunciate the test for a facial overbreadth challenge that "the overbreadth of a statute must not only be real, but substantial as well, judged in relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep."

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Broadrick_v._Oklahoma&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: External links")
]

U.S. Supreme Court Freedom of Speech Clause case law

**First Amendment to the United States Constitution **

Unprotected speech

Strict scrutiny

Overbreadth and
Vagueness doctrines

Symbolic speech

versus conduct

Content-based
restrictions

Content-neutral
restrictions

Compelled speech

Compelled subsidy
of others' speech

Government grants
and subsidies

…

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that applying overbreadth analysis constitutes manifestly strong medicine that is to be employed sparingly and only as a last resort
  • holding that applying overbreadth analysis constitutes manifestly strong medicine that is to be employed sparingly and only as a last resort
  • holding that an impermissibly vague enactment is one that is so indeterminate that persons “of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning”
  • holding that unless a statute is substantially overbroad, overbreadth can be handled on a case-by-case basis
  • holding that a ruling of facial invalidity “is, manifestly, strong medicine” and noting that “[i]t has been employed by the Court sparingly and only as a last resort”
  • holding that unless a statute is substantially overbroad, overbreadth can be handled on a case-by-case basis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: White, Burger, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnqijist, Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3,113 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

59 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Broadrick v. Oklahoma

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.