Smith-Caronia v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that statute precluding intentional disturbance of congressional sessions was narrowly tailored because it “restricted] the prohibited conduct to loud speech and other acts both of a nature to and specifically intended to disrupt the business of Congress”
• rejecting argument that statute must be given narrowing construction to apply only to “ ‘actual, material’ (or more than ‘de mini-mus’ ) disruptions”
• noting the “limited utility” of engaging in forum analysis when the “nature and extent of government regulation at issue would withstand First Amendment analysis” regardless

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).