Supreme Court· 6/28/2000

Hill v. Colorado

Citations

530 U.S. 703
120 S. Ct. 2480
147 L. Ed. 2d 597
2000 U.S. LEXIS 4486

How courts have described this case

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

holding that protestors had ample alternatives to communicate their message even if they could not commu- nicate with their intended audience where they preferred
holding that regulation of expressive activity is contentneutral if it is justified without reference to the content of regulated speech
recognizing that enforcing a law always requires some degree of discretion by law enforcement and that a degree of judgment is acceptable at times
holding that regulation of expressive activity is content-neutral if it is justified without reference to the content of regulated speech
holding that statute was not imper-missibly vague under the Due Process Clause because it provided a person of reasonable intelligence fair notice of what is prohibited
holding that statute was not impermissibly vague under the Due Process Clause because it provided a person of reasonable intelligence fair notice of what is prohibited

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kennedy, O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia, Souter, Stevens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

873 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

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

Other cases named Hill v. Colorado

5 other CourtListener records share 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.