A

WALKER v. BIRMINGHAM 388 U.S. 307 (1967)

The Supreme Court, 5–4, upheld criminal contempt convictions of eight black ministers, including MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. , for holding a CIVIL RIGHTS protest parade in violation of an INJUNCTION issued by an Alabama state court. The injunction, which forbade them from engaging in street parades without a permit, was issued EX PARTE, two days before the intended march. The order was based on a city ordinance that the Court later held unconstitutional for VAGUENESS in Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham (1969), a case arising out of the same events.

For the majority, Justice POTTER STEWART concluded that the ministers, once enjoined by a court order, were not entitled to disregard the injunction even if it had been granted unconstitutionally. Rather, they were obliged to ask the court to modify the order, or to seek relief from the injunction in another court.

Justice WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, for the four dissenters, pointed out that, in the absence of a court order, the FIRST AMENDMENT would have entitled the marchers to disregard the ordinance, which was INVALID ON ITS FACE. It was incongruous, he argued, to let the state alter this result simply by obtaining "the ex parte stamp of a judicial officer on a copy of the invalid ordinance." These views were echoed in separate dissents by Chief Justice EARL WARREN and Justice WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS. The Walker principle, though much criticized, remains the DOCTRINE of the Court.