Lovell v. City of Griffin
**Overview of Lovell v. City of Griffin**
Lovell v. City of Griffin is a significant case concerning First Amendment rights, particularly the freedoms of speech and press. The case arose when Alma Lovell, a member of the Jehovah's Witness Church, was prosecuted for distributing religious literature in Griffin, Georgia, without obtaining the necessary city permissions. The Supreme Court had previously ruled that the First Amendment's protections for free speech applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, yet had not explicitly extended religious freedom protections at that time. In a unanimous decision, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes emphasized that the city ordinance imposed an unjust prior restraint on the dissemination of ideas. He argued that the freedom to circulate materials is as vital as the freedom to publish them. While this case did not directly address the issue of religious freedom, it laid the groundwork for future rulings that would incorporate such protections, notably in subsequent cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses. Lovell v. City of Griffin highlights the evolving interpretation of First Amendment rights and the importance of protecting diverse modes of expression.
Lovell v. City of Griffin
Date: March 28, 1938
Citation: 303 U.S. 444
Issue: Freedom of speech
Significance: The Supreme Court held that a city ordinance prohibiting the distribution of pamphlets without a permit violated the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Alma Lovell, a member of the Jehovah’s Witness Church, was prosecuted for distributing religious literature in Griffin, Georgia, without the required permission from the city commissioner. The Supreme Court had earlier applied the First Amendment guarantee of free speech to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment in Gitlow v. New York (1925), but the Court had never ruled that the federal guarantee for religious freedom was binding on the states.
Speaking for an 8-0 majority, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes wrote that the ordinance constituted a system of prior restraint on the expression of ideas. He emphasized that the First Amendment freedom of press extended to pamphlets and other modes of disseminating information and that the freedom to circulate materials was just as essential as the freedom to publish them. Hughes found that it was not necessary to consider the issue of religious freedom. A similar case, Schneider v. Irvington (1939), was also decided under the freedom of speech and press guarantees. It was not until the third case involving the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Cantwell v. Connecticut (1940), that the Court incorporated the freedom of religious exercise into the Fourteenth Amendment.