From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Garner v. Louisiana
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued October 18–19, 1961
Decided December 11, 1961
Full case name John Burrell Garner, et al. v. State of Louisiana, Mary Briscoe, et al.
Citations 368 U.S. 157 (more)
82 S. Ct. 248; 7 L. Ed. 2d 207; 1961 U.S. LEXIS 28
Prior history Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Louisiana
The convictions were so totally devoid of evidentiary support as to violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black · Felix Frankfurter
William O. Douglas · Tom C. Clark
John M. Harlan II · William J. Brennan Jr.
Charles E. Whittaker · Potter Stewart
Case opinions
Majority Warren, joined by unanimous
Concurrence Frankfurter
Concurrence Douglas
Concurrence Harlan
Laws applied
United States Constitution, Amendment XIV

Garner v. Louisiana, 368 U.S. 157 (1961),[1] was a pivotal civil rights case argued by Thurgood Marshall before the Supreme Court. On December 11, 1961, the court unanimously ruled that Louisiana could not convict peaceful sit-in protesters who refused to leave dining establishments under the state's "disturbing the peace" laws.[2]


African-American students from Southern University sat at a "whites only" segregated lunch bar at Sitman's Drugstore in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The management summoned the Police after the students quietly remained despite being asked to relocate to another counter. After ordering the black patrons to leave, the Police arrested them and charged them with disturbing the peace, claiming that their behavior could "foreseeably disturb or alarm the public," according to the state's "disturbing the peace" statute.[3]

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People defended the student demonstrators as did the Kennedy administration's Justice Department, which filed a legal brief on their behalf.[4]

Opinion of the Court[edit]

In a 9-0 decision, the court ruled in the African-American students' favor, arguing the state violated due process of law under the 14th amendment and finding there was no evidence the students' behavior could have foreseeably disturbed the peace. In his written opinion, Justice John Marshall Harlan likened sit-in demonstrations to verbal expression as a form of free speech.[5] Justice William O. Douglas in his concurring opinion said, “For the police are supposed to be on the side of the Constitution, not on the side of discrimination. Yet if all constitutional questions are to be put aside and the problem treated merely in terms of disturbing the peace, I would have difficulty in reversing these judgments. I think, however, the constitutional questions must be reached and that they make reversal necessary.”[6]

Garner v. Louisiana was an important case for the Civil Rights Movement, and one of many civil rights cases argued before the Warren Court (1953–69). Eventually, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion or national origin in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce."


  1. ^ "Garner v. Louisiana, 368 U.S. 157 (1961)". FindLaw. Retrieved 2012-02-27. 
  2. ^ "1961 Supreme Court of the United States [Garner v. Louisiana] :: Southern University and A&M College" (PDF/HTML). 1961-07-17. his.1961.fou113.pdf. Retrieved 2012-07-17. 
  3. ^ "No Evidence to Support a Conviction. The Supreme Court's Decisions in Thompson v. City of Louisville and Garner v. Louisiana". University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 110 (8): 1137–1146. June 1962. doi:10.2307/3310734. JSTOR 3310734.  (subscription required)
  4. ^ Geer, J. G., W. J. Schiller, et al. (2011). Gateways to Democracy: An Introduction to American Government, Wadsworth Pub Co.
  5. ^ "First Amendment Timeline" (PDF). Retrieved 2013-11-03. 
  6. ^ Garner v. Louisiana. 368 U.S. 157. Supreme Court of the United States. 1961.


None of the audio/visual content is hosted on this site. All media is embedded from other sites such as GoogleVideo, Wikipedia, YouTube etc. Therefore, this site has no control over the copyright issues of the streaming media.

All issues concerning copyright violations should be aimed at the sites hosting the material. This site does not host any of the streaming media and the owner has not uploaded any of the material to the video hosting servers. Anyone can find the same content on Google Video or YouTube by themselves.

The owner of this site cannot know which documentaries are in public domain, which has been uploaded to e.g. YouTube by the owner and which has been uploaded without permission. The copyright owner must contact the source if he wants his material off the Internet completely.

Powered by YouTube
Wikipedia content is licensed under the GFDL and (CC) license