Talk:Cohen v. California/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Picture

I think this article would benefit from a picture of the jacket. I have personally seen such a picture but I am having a hard time finding it online. Perhaps another editor here would be able to find it. 98.165.151.225 (talk) 21:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Background of the Case

9/14/10 I am in no way a legal scholar, and in fact was only exposed to this decision today in my Law class. Still, I believe the case details on this page are inaccurate. My reading of the footnotes of the opinion has that Cohen had worn the jacket upon entering the building and then removed it when he entered the court room, allowing the police officer to take notice and speak to the judge. My reading of this article has that Cohen did not put on the coat until after he exited the court room, which creates an important distinction in his level of protest. I'm unwilling to change anything, though, as I am in no way an authority. Dontwriteplays (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You don't need to be an expert to accurately read a SCOTUS opinion. Could you provide the relevant quote from the opinion, cited to page and footnote? postdlf (talk) 18:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I think Dontwriteplays has it right. The opinion first states that:

‘On April 26, 1968, the defendant was observed in the Los Angeles County Courthouse in the corridor outside of division 20 of the municipal court wearing a jacket bearing the words ‘Fuck the Draft’ which were plainly visible. There were women and children present in the corridor. The defendant was arrested. The defendant testified that he wore the jacket knowing that the words were on the jacket as a means of informing the public of the depth of his feelings against the Vietnam War and the draft.

— John Marshall Harlan, Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 16 (1971)

Footnote 3 then states:

It is illuminating to note what transpired when Cohen entered a courtroom in the building. He removed his jacket and stood with it folded over his arm. Meanwhile, a policeman sent the presiding judge a note suggesting that Cohen be held in contempt of court. The judge declined to do so and Cohen was arrested by the officer only after he emerged from the courtroom.

— John Marshall Harlan, Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 19 n. 3 (1971)

Based on all this, my understanding is that Cohen wore the jacket into the courthouse, was observed in the corridor, then removed the jacket and entered the courtroom. A police officer who had seen (or heard about) Cohen's inflammatory jacket asked the judge to hold Cohen in contempt and, when that failed, arrested him when he left.--Maikul (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

FA-Class U.S. Supreme Court articles

From Category:FA-Class U.S. Supreme Court articles:

  1. Afroyim v. Rusk
  2. Ex parte Crow Dog
  3. Menominee Tribe v. United States
  4. Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
  5. United States v. Lara
  6. United States v. Wong Kim Ark
  7. Washington v. Texas

These might be good models for a quality improvement project for this article. — Cirt (talk) 03:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cohen v. California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:40, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cohen_v._California/Archive_1&oldid=1066169701"