Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 114 views

    Cantwell v. Connecticut 310 U.S. 296 May 20, 1940

    Uploaded by

    Edwin Villa
    1. The statute at issue gave too much discretion to the secretary of the public welfare council to approve or deny requests to solicit money for religious causes, violating free exercise of religion. 2. Jesse Cantwell was convicted of breach of peace for playing a phonographic record attacking the Catholic religion to two Catholic men who became angry. However, Cantwell had the right to peacefully share his religious views and his conduct was not noisy, truculent, or offensive. 3. The Court held that the statute violated free exercise of religion and Cantwell's conviction for breach of peace violated religious liberty, as his conduct did not disturb others or impede traffic.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Cantwell v. Connecticut 310 U.S. 296 May 20, 1940

    Uploaded by

    Edwin Villa
    114 views3 pages
    1. The statute at issue gave too much discretion to the secretary of the public welfare council to approve or deny requests to solicit money for religious causes, violating free exercise of religion. 2. Jesse Cantwell was convicted of breach of peace for playing a phonographic record attacking the Catholic religion to two Catholic men who became angry. However, Cantwell had the right to peacefully share his religious views and his conduct was not noisy, truculent, or offensive. 3. The Court held that the statute violated free exercise of religion and Cantwell's conviction for breach of peace violated religious liberty, as his conduct did not disturb others or impede traffic.

    Original Description:

    consti 2

    Original Title

    Cantwell V

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. The statute at issue gave too much discretion to the secretary of the public welfare council to approve or deny requests to solicit money for religious causes, violating free exercise of religion. 2. Jesse Cantwell was convicted of breach of peace for playing a phonographic record attacking the Catholic religion to two Catholic men who became angry. However, Cantwell had the right to peacefully share his religious views and his conduct was not noisy, truculent, or offensive. 3. The Court held that the statute violated free exercise of religion and Cantwell's conviction for breach of peace violated religious liberty, as his conduct did not disturb others or impede traffic.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    114 views3 pages

    Cantwell v. Connecticut 310 U.S. 296 May 20, 1940

    Uploaded by

    Edwin Villa
    1. The statute at issue gave too much discretion to the secretary of the public welfare council to approve or deny requests to solicit money for religious causes, violating free exercise of religion. 2. Jesse Cantwell was convicted of breach of peace for playing a phonographic record attacking the Catholic religion to two Catholic men who became angry. However, Cantwell had the right to peacefully share his religious views and his conduct was not noisy, truculent, or offensive. 3. The Court held that the statute violated free exercise of religion and Cantwell's conviction for breach of peace violated religious liberty, as his conduct did not disturb others or impede traffic.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Cantwell v. Connecticut 310 U.S.

    296 May 20, 1940

    Cantwell v. Connecticut
    310 U.S. 296 May 20, 1940

    KTA: The statute gives the Council too much discretion in its application and is thus obnoxious
    to the free exercise of religion. It also amounts to prior restraint. The functions of the Council (in
    approving or denying authorization) were not merely ministerial but were discretionary. As regards
    the breach of public peace/order, it is a situation analogous to a conviction under a statute sweeping
    in a great variety of conduct under a general and indefinite characterization, leaving to the
    executive and judicial branches too wide a discretion in its application.

    Facts:

    The petitioners, Newton Cantwell and his two sons, Jesse and Russell, are members of the religion
    Jehovah’s Witness. They were arrested in New Haven, Connecticut, and were convicted for the
    third and fifth count.

    Section 294 of the General Statutes of Connecticut states that:


    No person shall solicit money, services, subscriptions or any valuable thing for any alleged
    religious, charitable or philanthropic cause, from other than a member of the organization whose
    benefit such person is soliciting or within the county in which such person or organization is
    located unless such cause shall have been approved by the secretary of the public welfare council.

    The facts adduced to sustain the convictions on the third count follow.

    1. The appellants went from house to house in New Haven equipped with a bag containing books
    and pamphlets on religious subjects, a portable phonograph, and a set of records, all of which were
    used to proclaim their religion, Jehovah’s Witness.

    2. They asked the people they would interview if they could play their record. If permission was
    granted, he asked the person to buy the book described, and, upon refusal, he solicited such
    contribution towards the publication of the pamphlets, as the listener was willing to make. If a
    contribution was received, a pamphlet was delivered upon condition that it would be read.

    3. 90% of the residents in the neighborhood are Roman Catholics. The phonograph record was
    entitled “Enemies” included an attack on the Catholic religion.

    The facts adduced to sustain the conviction of Jesse Cantwell on the fifth count.

    1. Jesse Cantwell stopped two men in the street, asked, and received, permission to play a
    phonograph record. He played the record “Enemies”, which contained lyrics that attacked the
    Catholic religion, the religion of the two men.

    2. Enraged by the contents of the record, they were tempted to strike Cantwell unless he went
    away. On being asked to leave, Jesse Cantwell left. There was no evidence that he was personally
    offensive or entered into any argument with those he interviewed.

    Issue:

    1. Whether or not Section 294 of the General Statutes of Connecticut is invalid and unconstitutional
    for violating the freedom of religion.
    2. Whether or not the defendant’s conviction of the common law offense of breach of the peace
    violated the constitutional guarantees of religious liberty and freedom of speech.

    Held/Ratio:

    1. Yes. In this case, the statute deprives the appellants of their liberty without due process of law.
    The statute does not impose a mere ministerial duty on the secretary of the welfare council, but a
    discretionary one.

    2. Yes. The conviction of Jesse Cantwell on the fifth count must be set aside. The offense known
    as breach of the peace embraces a great variety of conduct destroying or menacing public order
    and tranquility. It includes not only violent acts, but acts and words likely to produce violence in
    others.

    Having these considerations in mind, we note that Jesse Cantwell had a right to be where he was
    and had a right to peacefully impart his views to others. There is no showing that his deportment
    was noisy, truculent, overbearing or offensive. He requested of two pedestrians permission to play
    to them a phonograph record. The permission was granted. It is not claimed that he intended to
    insult or affront the hearers by playing the record. It is plain that he wished only to interest them
    in his propaganda. The sound of the phonograph is not shown to have disturbed residents of the
    street, to have drawn a crowd, or to have impeded traffic. Thus far, he had invaded no right or
    interest of the public, or of the men accosted.

    You might also like