Gent v. Arkansas
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ark. Probable jurisdiction noted limited to Questions 1 and 2 presented by the jurisdictional statement which read as follows:
“1. Is Act 261 of The Arkansas Acts of 1961 invalid in that on its face and as applied it impairs the freedom of expression protected by the First, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, in that it operates as a forbidden prior restraint on expression?
“2. Is Act 261 of The Arkansas Acts of 1961 invalid in that on its face and as applied it impairs the freedom of expression protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, in that it is vague and uncertain?”
As to the other questions presented, which are non-appealable, treating the papers as a petition for a writ of *938 certiorari, certiorari is denied. Mishkin v. New York, 383 U. S. 502, at 512-514 .
Emanuel Redfield for appellants. Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Stewart would note probable jurisdiction without limitation.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.