Jones v. Opelika
Cases that cite this one
88 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Institute in Basic Youth Conflicts, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization (Cal. Ct. App. 1985)
- Evans v. Romer (Colo. 1994)
- Marsh v. Alabama (Supreme Court of the United States 1946)
- Follett v. Town of McCormick (Supreme Court of the United States 1944)
- In re Porterfield (Cal. 1946)
- Erie Telecommunications, Inc. v. City of Erie (District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania 1987)
- Muhammad Temple of Islam-Shreveport v. City of Shreveport (District Court, W.D. Louisiana 1974)
- Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham (Supreme Court of the United States 1969)
- Walker v. City of Birmingham (Supreme Court of the United States 1967)
- Staub v. City of Baxley (Supreme Court of the United States 1958)
- Bailey v. Richardson (D.C. Cir. 1950)
- Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. Clark (D.C. Cir. 1949)
- Barsky v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1948)
- Titan Sports, Inc. v. State Athletic Control Board (New Jersey Tax Court 1990)
- Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. State Board of Equalization (Cal. Ct. App. 1988)
- City Of Watseka v. Illinois Public Action Council (7th Cir. 1986)
- City of Watseka v. Illinois Public Action Council (7th Cir. 1986)
- Estate of French (D.C. 1976)
- Key v. Doyle (D.C. 1976)
- Breard v. City of Alexandria (Supreme Court of the United States 1951)
- Robert v. City of Norfolk (Va. 1948)
- In re Mares (Cal. Ct. App. 1946)
- Roscoe Jones v. City of Opelika. Lois Bowden and Zada Sanders v. City of Fort Smith, Arkansas. Charles Jobin v. The State of Arizona (Supreme Court of the United States 1943)
- Henderson v. Stalder (5th Cir. 2002)
- Operation Rescue-National v. Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas, Inc. (Tex. 1998)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
(announced by Me. Justice Douglas) :
The judgments in these cases were affirmed at the October Term, 1941. 316 U. S. 584. Because the issues in all three cases were of the same character as those brought before us in other cases by applications for certiorari at the present term, we ordered a reargument and heard these cases together with Murdock v. Pennsylvania, post, p. 105. For the reasons stated in the opinion of the Court in the Murdock case, and in the dissenting opinions filed in the present cases after the argument last term, the Court is of opinion that the judgment in each case should be reversed. The judgments of this Court heretofore entered in these cases are therefore vacated, and the judgments of the state courts are reversed.
So ordered.
For dissenting opinions, see post, pp. 117-140.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.