Talley v. California
| Talley v. California | |
|---|---|
| Argued January 13–14, 1960 Decided March 7, 1960 | |
| Full case name | Talley v. California |
| Citations | 362 U.S. 60 (more) 80 S. Ct. 536; 4 L. Ed. 2d 559; 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1948 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Holding | |
| The distribution of anonymous handbills is protected by the First Amendment. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Black, joined by Warren, Douglas, Harlan, Brennan, Stewart |
| Concurrence | Harlan |
| Dissent | Clark, joined by Frankfurter, Whittaker |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. I | |
Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States voided a Los Angeles city ordinance which forbade the distribution of any handbills in any place under any circumstances if the handbills did not contain the name and address of the person for whom it was prepared, distributed, or sponsored.
Manuel Talley was distributing handbills that promoted the boycott of businesses that refused to hire minorities. The handbills he distributed were anonymous which resulted in the California municipal court to rule that he was violating the ordinance and fined him $10. He appealed to the California appellate court which affirmed his conviction. He appealed again to the supreme court which found the ordinance unconstitutional.
Talley is often cited for the proposition that identification requirements burden speech.