Ex Parte Divine Burton v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the doctrine's benefits—eliminating the chilling effect that overbroad laws have on nonparties—must be weighed against its costs—blocking perfectly constitutional applications of a law
• holding that law is unconstitutionally over-broad if it punishes “substantial” amount of protected free speech, when considered in relation to its “plainly legitimate sweep” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• recognizing that the doctrine’s benefits — eliminating the chilling effect that overbroad laws have on nonparties — must be weighed against its costs — blocking perfectly constitutional applications of a law
• holding that a plaintiff bringing an overbreadth challenge must demonstrate that the statute “punishes a substantial amount of protected speech, judged in relation to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep” (internal quotation marks ■ omitted)
• holding that the defendant had not shown that the contested policy “prohibits a ‘substantial’ amount of protected speech in relation to its many legitimate applications”
• acknowledging that overbreadth adjudication reduces the “social costs” of the “considerable burden (and sometimes risk) of vindicating [] rights through case-by-case litigation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).