Mills v. Alabama

Supreme Court of the United States · 1966 · Federal Courts

Federal CourtsFirst AmendmentFreedom of the PressFinal Judgment JurisdictionFirst Amendmentfreedom of the presselection day editorialpolitical speech

Facts

On election day in Birmingham in 1962, the Birmingham Post-Herald published an editorial written by its editor, James E. Mills, urging voters to adopt a mayor-council form of government instead of retaining the city commission form. Mills was charged under § 285 of the Alabama Corrupt Practices Act, which made it a crime on election day to do any electioneering or solicit votes in support of or opposition to a proposition being voted on that day. The only basis for the charge was that Mills wrote and published the editorial on election day. Mills conceded he wrote and published the editorial, so the constitutional validity of applying the statute to that publication was the central issue.

Issue

Whether a State may, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, punish a newspaper editor for publishing an election-day editorial urging people to vote a particular way on a ballot proposition. Also, whether the Alabama Supreme Court's decision was sufficiently final to permit Supreme Court review under 28 U.S.C. § 1257.

Rule

The First Amendment, as applied to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, forbids a state from making it a crime for a newspaper editor to publish an editorial on election day urging voters to vote one way or another in a public election. A state law cannot be sustained by a mere test of reasonableness when it criminalizes this kind of core press discussion of governmental affairs.

🔒

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

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Columbus, Ohio, the legislature makes it a misdemeanor for any newspaper to publish, on election day, an editorial urging voters to support or oppose a statewide constitutional amendment. The Columbus Ledger runs an election-day editorial urging a "yes" vote, and the only basis for prosecution is the editorial's publication.

If the editor challenges the law as applied, what is the strongest constitutional argument?

Explanation. The controlling rule is that the First and Fourteenth Amendments forbid a State from making it a crime for a newspaper editor to publish an election-day editorial urging voters to vote one way on a public issue. The majority treated that as core press discussion of governmental affairs and an obvious abridgment of press freedom. A mere appeal to reasonableness or the brief duration of the restriction does not save the law.