法学论文/杨日旭(14)
⑤“游行示威群众不得坚持有权封闭某条街道及进出公私场所之通路，亦不得禁止任何拒听说教之行人这通行”。（“A group of demonstrators could not insist upon the rright to cordon off a street, or entrance to a public or private building, and allow no one to pass who did not agree to listen to their exhortations.”）
由以上判例则知，在美国大街游行示威的集会自由权并非一绝对的权利。
（7）在法院前之示威游行Cox v. Louisiana, 1965, No. 49：本案之第三个争议主题为被告Cox在法院“附近”（near）游行是否违法而应加惩处。路易西安那州法律明文规定“任何人在法院或法院附近举牌抗议或游行示威，意图干涉、阴挠、妨害司法行政，或意图影响法官、陪审员、证人及司法官员、执行职务，均应处五千元以上罚金或一年以下之临禁，或两罚并处。”（“Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officers, in the discharge of his duty pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the State of Louisiana shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”）。根据此一法律，地方法院以被告违法在法院对街一○一尺“附近”示威游行，抗拒警方要求群众解散之命令，因而将之判刑。被告不服，认为地方法院及州法院均侵犯其在宪法上之言论及集会自由权，遂经次上诉。最后联邦最高法院裁决该州最高法官判罪所据之理由不足，遂宜告原判不能成立，被告终因无罪而开释。联邦最高法院所持之理由如下：
总共18页
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] 14
[15] [16] [17] [18] 上一页 下一页