Summary

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham…

I agree that, as construed by Alabama two years after Shuttlesworth was convicted, § 1142 cannot be held unconstitutional on its face. I agree that if there were a rational basis for charging Shuttlesworth with violating the section as so construed, he could be retried if Alabama should choose so vigorously to protect the sidewalks of Birmingham. Civil rights leaders, like all other persons, are subject to the law and must comply with it. Their calling carries no immunity. Their cause confers no privilege to break or disregard the law.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham…

In my view, there is nothing in the facts which justified an arrest and conviction. Prior to the officer's command the situation was that a small group of people occupying one-half of the sidewalk were engaged in orderly conversation. Promptly upon the officer's command, the group began to disperse and only Shuttlesworth remained. He, alone, cannot be held to have blocked the sidewalk.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham…

His rhetorical questions may have irritated the patrolman; but a policeman's lot is not a happy one-and certainly, in context, Shuttlesworth's questions did not rise to the magnitude of an offense against the laws of Alabama. If one were to confine oneself to the surface version of the facts, a general alarm for the people of Birmingham would be in order. Their use of the sidewalks would be hazardous beyond measure.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature