City of Seattle v. Webster
Washington Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partUtter, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part)— This ordinance is overbroad without a narrowing construction. I concur in the majority's judgment on the other points raised. I write separately to urge a limiting construction and to expand on some points raised in the briefs.
I
Evaluation of an overbreadth claim requires the court to decide whether the ordinance before it sweeps within its prohibitions conduct protected by the First Amendment. See majority, at 640-41 (citing Seattle v. Huff, 111 Wn.2d 923, 925, 767 P.2d 572 (1989)). The First Amendment protects solicitation for charitable…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Perry Education Ass'n v. Perry Local Educators' Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Clark v. Community for Creative Non-ViolenceSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.