Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Schad v. Mount Ephraim
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Schad v. Mount Ephraim | |
Court | Supreme Court of the United States |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | June 1, 1981 |
Appealed from | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Facts
James Schad (defendant "Schad") opened an adult bookstore in the Borough of Mount Ephraim (plaintiff "Ephraim") in New York in 1973.
3 years later, Schad installed devices in his store allowing customers to watch live naked burlesque dancing.
In the 1970s, town of Ephraim didn't permit live entertainment in a commercial zone.Procedural History
Ephraim filed legal complaints against Schad for violation of the zoning ordinance.
Schad replied that Ephraim's ordinance prohibiting all live entertainment is over-broad and infringes on his right to freedom of expression under the 1st Amendment.
Schad loses in municipal court & is fined.
Schad loses at all courts of New Jersey. New Jersey Supreme Court denied review of the case.Issues
Is a New Jersey town's ordinance prohibiting all live entertainment impermissibly over-broad?
Holding
SCOTUS negates all New Jersey courts by holding that the Ephraim ordinance was over-broad by banning protected expressions of speech without sufficient justification.
The Supreme Court ruled 7-2.Reasons
SCOTUS stated that Ephraim's exclusion of live entertainment to avoid harmful effect such as trash & parking is not supported by evidence and, thus, rejected.
Rule
Under the overbreadth doctrine, a law may be facially challenged because it prohibits protected & unprotected speech.
Resources
- Video summary at Quimbee
- Case text at Justia
- Case text at Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School