HomeCase briefs › Civil Procedure

Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston

Supreme Court of the United States · 1995 · Civil Procedure
Civil ProcedureConstitutional LawPropertyTortsFirst AmendmentFreedom of SpeechPublic AccommodationsFirst Amendment

Facts

The South Boston Allied War Veterans Council had long organized Boston's St. Patrick's Day-Evacuation Day Parade under a city permit. GLIB, an organization formed to march as openly gay, lesbian, and bisexual descendants of Irish immigrants, sought to participate as its own unit carrying its own banner, but the Council refused to admit it in 1993. GLIB sued under Massachusetts's public accommodations law, and the state courts ordered that GLIB be allowed to participate on the same terms as other groups. In the Supreme Court, respondents relied solely on the state public accommodations law, not on any claim of state action.

Issue

May a state, through its public accommodations law, require private organizers of an expressive parade to include a group carrying a message the organizers do not wish to convey? More specifically, does compelled inclusion of GLIB as a parade unit violate the parade organizers' First Amendment rights?

Rule

A parade is expressive activity protected by the First Amendment, even without a narrow or particularized message. Because a private speaker has autonomy to choose the content of its own expression, including what not to say, the state may not compel the speaker to include another expressive unit when that inclusion alters the expressive content of the speaker's message, absent some further legitimate end beyond forcing modification of the speech itself.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

  • The court's holding and reasoning
  • Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
  • 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
A private civic committee in Savannah obtains the annual permit for a downtown heritage parade. The parade includes marching bands, dancers, antique tractors, religious banners, labor groups, and neighborhood floats, but the committee has never announced a single official theme.

A state court rules that the parade is not protected speech because it lacks a narrow, particularized message. Which is the best constitutional assessment?

Explanation. The majority held that parades are inherently expressive activity. Marchers, music, costumes, banners, and floats collectively communicate ideas to bystanders, and First Amendment protection does not depend on a narrow or particularized message. A private organizer does not lose protection merely because the parade includes many voices or eclectic themes. (Derived from Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston (1995).)