Legal Opinion
Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided October 9, 1973No. 72-419PublishedCited by 687 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Powell
The Human Relations Ordinance of the City of Pittsburgh (the Ordinance) has been construed below by *378the courts of Pennsylvania as forbidding newspapers to carry “help-wanted” advertisements in sex-designated columns except where the employer or advertiser is free to make hiring or employment referral decisions on the basis of sex. We are called upon to decide whether the Ordinance as so construed violates the freedoms of speech and of the press guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments. This issue is a sensitive one, and a full understanding of the context in which it arises is…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Near v. Minnesota Ex Rel. OlsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Lovell v. City of GriffinSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Murdock v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by687 opinions
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- New York v. FerberSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Nebraska Press Assn. v. StuartSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
682 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.