Jackson v. Dorrier

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the phrase “tends to disturb” the peace in a city noise ordinance was not unconstitutionally vague
• implying that a law banning excessively loud demonstrations was not facially invalid because its terms could not invite \subjective or discriminatory enforcement\
• holding that Rockford's antinoise ordinance was not unconstitutionally vague
• observing that fair warning and the prevention of arbitrary enforcement are two of the most important values offended by vague laws
• noting that vague laws violate the “basic principle of due process,” including “fair warning” and “explicit standards for those who apply [the laws]”
• holding that Rockford's anti-noise ordinance was not unconstitutionally vague

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).