Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville
| Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville | |
|---|---|
| Argued February 26, 1975 Decided June 23, 1975 | |
| Full case name | Richard Erznoznik etc. v. City of Jacksonville |
| Citations | 422 U.S. 205 (more) 95 S. Ct. 2268; 45 L. Ed. 2d 125; 1 Media L. Rep. 1508 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 288 So. 2d 260 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974), cert. denied, 294 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1974), prob. juris. noted, 419 U.S. 822 (1974). |
| Holding | |
| The Court ruled that the ordinance was invalid on its face because the ordinance discriminated among movies solely on the basis of nudity, but not all offensive content so it could not be justified. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Powell, joined by Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, Marshall, Blackmun |
| Concurrence | Douglas |
| Dissent | Burger, joined by Rehnquist |
| Dissent | White |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const., amend. I; Jacksonville Municipal Code § 330.313 | |
Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville, 422 U.S. 205 (1975), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning a city ordinance prohibiting the showing of films containing nudity by a drive-in theater located in Jacksonville, Florida.