rejecting the notion that sleeping in public parks is expressive conduct about the plight of the homeless
How later courts described this case
- rejecting the notion that sleeping in public parks is expressive conduct about the plight of the homeless
- first amendment does not guarantee right to deliver message in the most effective manner possible, nor does it guarantee media attention
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
SPOTTSWOOD W. ROBINSON, III, Chief Judge, and J. SKELLY WRIGHT, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
We join in reversal, and in Judge Mikva’s opinion with a caveat to one branch of its First Amendment analysis. As the opinion explains convincingly, sleeping in tents at the demonstration sites is a vivid and forceful component of the public message the demonstrators seek to convey; it summons First Amendment scrutiny because, qua sleeping, it is expressive. We intimate no view as to whether sleeping would implicate the First Amendment were it not to add its own communicative value to the demonstration.