national
endowment
arts
et
al
karen
finley
et
argued
march
decided
june
held
section
facially
valid
neither
inherently
interferes
first
amendment
rights
violates
constitutional
vagueness
principles
pp
respondents
confront
heavy
burden
advancing
facial
constitutional
challenge
demonstrated
substantial
risk
application
lead
suppression
free
expression
see
broadrick
oklahoma
premise
respondents
claim
constrains
agency
ability
fund
certain
categories
artistic
expression
provision
however
simply
adds
considerations
process
preclude
awards
projects
might
deemed
indecent
disrespectful
place
conditions
grants
even
specify
factors
must
given
particular
weight
reviewing
application
regardless
whether
nea
view
formulation
diverse
advisory
panels
sufficient
comply
congress
command
fact
reasonable
reading
plain
text
clearly
impose
categorical
requirement
furthermore
political
context
surrounding
decency
respect
clause
adoption
inconsistent
respondents
assertion
legislation
bipartisan
proposal
introduced
counterweight
amendments
eliminated
nea
funding
substantially
constrained
authority
section
merely
admonishes
nea
take
decency
respect
consideration
perceive
realistic
danger
utilized
preclude
punish
expression
particular
views
typically
strikes
legislation
facially
unconstitutional
dangers
evident
substantial
see
paul
given
varied
interpretations
decency
respect
criteria
urged
parties
provision
vague
exhortation
take
consideration
seems
unlikely
significantly
compromise
first
amendment
values
nea
enabling
statute
contemplates
number
indisputably
constitutional
applications
decency
respect
prong
well
established
decency
permissible
factor
educational
suitability
motivates
consideration
see
board
island
trees
union
free
school
dist
pico
statute
already
provides
agency
must
take
cultural
diversity
account
references
permissible
applications
alone
sufficient
sustain
statute
neither
persuaded
applications
language
give
rise
suppression
protected
expression
considerations
may
taken
account
consequence
nature
arts
funding
nea
limited
resources
allocate
among
many
artistically
excellent
projects
basis
wide
variety
subjective
criteria
respondent
reliance
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
overturned
public
university
objective
decision
denying
funding
student
publications
religious
editorial
therefore
misplaced
nea
mandate
make
aesthetic
judgments
inherently
excellence
threshold
nea
support
sets
apart
subsidy
issue
rosenberger
moreover
although
first
amendment
applies
subsidy
context
congress
wide
latitude
set
spending
priorities
see
regan
taxation
representation
unless
applied
manner
raises
concern
suppression
disfavored
viewpoints
uphold
pp
lower
courts
also
erred
invalidating
unconstitutionally
vague
first
fifth
amendments
protect
speakers
arbitrary
discriminatory
enforcement
vague
standards
see
naacp
button
section
terms
undeniably
opaque
appeared
criminal
statute
regulatory
scheme
raise
substantial
vagueness
concerns
unlikely
however
speakers
compelled
steer
far
clear
forbidden
area
context
nea
grants
practical
matter
artists
may
conform
speech
believe
nea
decisionmaking
criteria
order
acquire
funding
government
acting
patron
rather
sovereign
consequences
imprecision
constitutionally
severe
context
selective
subsidies
always
feasible
congress
legislate
clarity
indeed
accept
respondents
vagueness
argument
call
question
constitutionality
many
valuable
government
programs
awarding
scholarships
grants
basis
subjective
criteria
excellence
pp
reversed
remanded
endowment
arts
finley
syllabus
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
stevens
kennedy
breyer
joined
ginsburg
joined
except
part
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
thomas
joined
souter
filed
dissenting
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
national
endowment
arts
et
al
petitioners
karen
finley
etal
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
delivered
opinion
national
foundation
arts
humanities
act
amended
requires
chairperson
national
endowment
arts
nea
ensure
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
criteria
grant
applications
judged
taking
consideration
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
case
review
appeals
determination
face
impermissibly
discriminates
basis
viewpoint
void
vagueness
first
fifth
amendments
conclude
facially
valid
neither
inherently
interferes
first
amendment
rights
violates
constitutional
vagueness
principles
establishment
nea
congress
embarked
broadly
conceived
national
policy
support
arts
see
pledging
federal
funds
help
create
sustain
climate
encouraging
freedom
thought
imagination
inquiry
also
material
conditions
facilitating
release
creative
talent
enabling
statute
vests
nea
substantial
discretion
award
grants
identifies
broadest
funding
priorities
including
artistic
cultural
significance
giving
emphasis
american
creativity
cultural
diversity
professional
excellence
encouragement
public
knowledge
education
understanding
appreciation
arts
see
applications
nea
funding
initially
reviewed
advisory
panels
composed
experts
relevant
field
arts
amendments
enabling
statute
panels
must
reflect
diverse
artistic
cultural
points
view
include
wide
geographic
ethnic
minority
representation
well
lay
individuals
knowledgeable
arts
panels
report
national
council
arts
council
turn
advises
nea
chairperson
chairperson
ultimate
authority
award
grants
may
approve
application
council
made
negative
recommendation
since
nea
distributed
three
billion
dollars
grants
individuals
organizations
funding
served
catalyst
increased
state
corporate
foundation
support
arts
congress
recently
restricted
availability
federal
funding
individual
artists
confining
grants
primarily
qualifying
organizations
state
arts
agencies
constraining
see
department
interior
related
agencies
appropriations
act
pub
stat
far
largest
portion
grants
distributed
fiscal
year
awarded
directly
state
arts
agencies
remaining
categories
substantial
grants
allocated
symphony
orchestras
fine
arts
museums
dance
theater
foundations
opera
associations
see
national
endowment
arts
fy
grants
creation
presentation
throughout
nea
history
handful
agency
roughly
awards
generated
formal
complaints
misapplied
funds
abuse
public
trust
two
provocative
works
however
prompted
public
controversy
led
congressional
revaluation
nea
funding
priorities
efforts
increase
oversight
procedures
institute
contemporary
art
university
pennsylvania
used
visual
arts
grant
received
nea
fund
retrospective
photographer
robert
mapplethorpe
work
exhibit
entitled
perfect
moment
included
homoerotic
photographs
several
members
congress
condemned
pornographic
see
cong
rec
members
also
denounced
artist
andres
serrano
work
piss
christ
photograph
crucifix
immersed
urine
see
id
serrano
awarded
grant
southeast
center
contemporary
art
organization
received
nea
support
considering
nea
appropriations
fiscal
year
congress
reacted
controversy
surrounding
mapplethorpe
serrano
photographs
eliminating
agency
budget
precise
amount
contributed
two
exhibits
nea
grant
recipients
congress
also
enacted
amendment
providing
nea
funds
may
used
promote
disseminate
produce
materials
judgment
nea
may
considered
obscene
including
limited
depictions
sadomasochism
homoeroticism
sexual
exploitation
children
individuals
engaged
sex
acts
taken
whole
serious
literary
artistic
political
scientific
value
department
interior
related
agencies
appropriations
act
pub
stat
nea
implemented
congress
mandate
instituting
requirement
grantees
certify
writing
utilize
federal
funding
engage
projects
inconsistent
criteria
appropriations
bill
certification
requirement
subsequently
invalidated
unconstitutionally
vague
federal
district
see
bella
lewitzky
dance
foundation
frohnmayer
supp
cd
cal
nea
appeal
decision
appropriations
bill
congress
also
agreed
create
independent
commission
constitutional
law
scholars
review
nea
procedures
assess
possibility
focused
standards
public
arts
funding
commission
report
issued
september
concluded
constitutional
obligation
provide
arts
funding
also
recommended
nea
rescind
certification
requirement
cautioned
legislation
setting
forth
content
restrictions
instead
commission
suggested
procedural
changes
enhance
role
advisory
panels
statutory
reaffirmation
high
place
nation
accords
fostering
mutual
respect
disparate
beliefs
values
among
us
see
independent
commission
report
congress
national
endowment
arts
record
doc
exh
hereinafter
report
congress
informed
commission
recommendations
cognizant
pending
judicial
challenges
funding
limitations
appropriations
bill
congress
debated
several
proposals
reform
nea
process
considered
agency
reauthorization
fall
house
rejected
crane
amendment
virtually
eliminated
nea
see
cong
rec
rohrabacher
amendment
introduced
prohibition
awarding
grants
used
promote
distribute
disseminate
produce
matter
purpose
effect
denigrating
beliefs
tenets
objects
particular
religion
denigrating
individual
group
individuals
basis
race
sex
handicap
national
origin
id
ultimately
congress
adopted
amendment
bipartisan
compromise
members
opposing
funding
restrictions
favoring
guidance
agency
relevant
part
amendment
became
directs
chairperson
establishing
procedures
judge
artistic
merit
grant
applications
tak
consideration
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
nea
promulgated
official
interpretation
provision
december
council
unanimously
adopted
resolution
implement
merely
ensuring
members
advisory
panels
conduct
initial
review
grant
applications
represent
geographic
ethnic
aesthetic
diversity
see
minutes
retreat
national
council
arts
reprinted
app
transcript
retreat
national
council
arts
reprinted
id
john
frohnmayer
chairperson
nea
also
declared
count
procedures
ensuring
diverse
membership
peer
review
panels
fulfill
congress
mandate
see
id
four
individual
respondents
case
karen
finley
john
fleck
holly
hughes
tim
miller
performance
artists
applied
nea
grants
enacted
advisory
panel
recommended
approval
respondents
projects
initially
receiving
frohnmayer
request
reconsider
three
applications
majority
council
subsequently
recommended
disapproval
june
nea
informed
respondents
denied
funding
respondents
filed
suit
alleging
nea
violated
first
amendment
rights
rejecting
applications
political
grounds
failed
follow
statutory
procedures
basing
denial
criteria
set
forth
nea
enabling
statute
breached
confidentiality
grant
applications
release
quotations
press
violation
privacy
act
respondents
sought
restoration
recommended
grants
reconsideration
applications
well
damages
alleged
privacy
act
violations
congress
enacted
respondents
joined
national
association
artists
organizations
naao
amended
complaint
challenge
provision
void
vagueness
impermissibly
viewpoint
based
first
amended
complaint
record
doc
mar
district
denied
nea
motion
judgment
pleadings
supp
cd
cal
discovery
nea
agreed
settle
individual
respondents
statutory
constitutional
claims
paying
artists
amount
vetoed
grants
damages
attorney
fees
see
stipulation
settlement
agreement
record
doc
pp
june
district
granted
summary
judgment
favor
respondents
facial
constitutional
challenge
enjoined
enforcement
provision
see
rejected
argument
nea
comply
structuring
grant
selection
process
provide
diverse
advisory
panels
id
provision
stated
fails
adequately
notify
applicants
required
circumscribe
nea
discretion
id
reasoning
nature
pluralistic
society
infinite
number
values
beliefs
correlatively
may
national
standards
decency
concluded
given
effect
consistent
fifth
amendment
due
process
requirement
id
citing
grayned
city
rockford
drawing
analogy
arts
funding
public
universities
ruled
first
amendment
constrains
nea
grantmaking
process
clearly
reaches
substantial
amount
protected
speech
impermissibly
overbroad
face
government
seek
stay
district
injunction
consequently
nea
applied
since
june
divided
panel
appeals
affirmed
district
ruling
majority
agreed
district
nea
compelled
adoption
alter
grantmaking
procedures
ensure
applications
judged
according
decency
respect
criteria
chairperson
reasoned
discretion
ignore
obligation
enforce
part
give
cramped
construction
id
concluding
decency
respect
criteria
susceptible
objective
definition
held
gives
rise
danger
arbitrary
discriminatory
application
void
vagueness
first
fifth
amendments
id
alternative
ruled
violates
first
amendment
prohibition
restrictions
protected
speech
government
funding
arts
explained
traditional
sphere
free
expression
rust
sullivan
area
government
stated
intention
encourage
diversity
views
private
speakers
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
accordingly
finding
restriction
sole
rationale
operative
principle
rosenberger
supra
noting
nea
failure
articulate
compelling
interest
provision
declared
facially
invalid
dissent
asserted
first
amendment
protects
artists
rights
express
indecently
disrespectfully
like
compel
government
fund
speech
id
kleinfeld
dissenting
challenged
provision
dissent
contended
prohibit
nea
funding
indecent
offensive
art
merely
required
agency
consider
decency
respect
criteria
grant
selection
process
id
moreover
according
dissent
reasoning
vagueness
principles
applicable
direct
regulation
speech
bearing
selective
award
prizes
government
may
draw
distinctions
based
content
viewpoint
making
funding
decisions
id
three
judges
dis
sented
denial
rehearing
en
banc
maintaining
panel
decision
gave
statute
implausible
construction
applied
vagueness
doctrine
belong
extended
first
amendment
principles
situation
first
amendment
cover
granted
certiorari
reverse
judgment
appeals
ii
respondents
raise
facial
constitutional
challenge
consequently
confront
heavy
burden
advancing
claim
rust
supra
facial
invalidation
manifestly
strong
medicine
employed
sparingly
last
resort
broadrick
oklahoma
see
also
dallas
noting
facial
challenges
legislation
generally
disfavored
prevail
respondents
must
demonstrate
substantial
risk
application
provision
lead
suppression
speech
see
broadrick
supra
respondents
argue
provision
paradigmatic
example
viewpoint
discrimination
rejects
artistic
speech
either
fails
respect
mainstream
values
offends
standards
decency
premise
respondents
claim
constrains
agency
ability
fund
certain
categories
artistic
expression
nea
however
reads
provision
merely
hortatory
contends
stops
well
short
absolute
restriction
section
adds
considerations
process
preclude
awards
projects
might
deemed
indecent
disrespectful
place
conditions
grants
even
specify
factors
must
given
particular
weight
reviewing
application
indeed
agency
asserts
adequately
implemented
merely
ensuring
representation
various
backgrounds
points
view
advisory
panels
analyze
grant
applications
see
declaration
randolph
mcausland
deputy
chairman
programs
nea
reprinted
app
stating
nea
implements
provision
ensuring
peer
review
panels
represent
variety
geographical
areas
aesthetic
views
professions
areas
expertise
races
ethnic
groups
gender
include
lay
person
decide
whether
nea
formulation
diverse
advisory
panels
sufficient
comply
congress
fact
reasonable
reading
statute
clear
however
text
imposes
categorical
requirement
advisory
language
stands
sharp
contrast
congressional
efforts
prohibit
funding
certain
classes
speech
congress
fact
intended
affirmatively
constrain
nea
authority
done
uncertain
terms
see
bscenity
without
artistic
merit
protected
speech
shall
funded
furthermore
like
plain
language
political
context
surrounding
adoption
decency
respect
clause
inconsistent
respondents
assertion
provision
compels
nea
deny
funding
basis
viewpoint
discriminatory
criteria
legislation
bipartisan
proposal
introduced
counterweight
amendments
aimed
eliminating
nea
funding
substantially
constraining
authority
see
cong
rec
independent
commission
cautioned
congress
adoption
distinct
standards
funding
commission
report
suggests
additional
criteria
selection
incorporated
part
selection
process
perhaps
part
definition
excellence
rather
isolated
treated
exogenous
considerations
report
congress
keeping
recommendation
criteria
inform
assessment
artistic
merit
congress
declined
disallow
particular
viewpoints
sponsors
noted
urging
rejection
rohrabacher
amendment
start
road
prohibiting
categories
expression
categories
indeed
constitutionally
protected
speech
end
one
member
aversions
end
others
different
sensibilities
different
values
begin
cong
rec
statement
coleman
see
also
id
statement
williams
arguing
rohrabacher
amendment
prevent
funding
jasper
johns
flag
series
merchant
venice
chorus
line
birth
nation
grapes
wrath
contrast
vote
one
sponsors
stated
done
one
important
thing
amendment
maintained
integrity
freedom
expression
id
admonishes
nea
merely
take
decency
respect
consideration
legislation
aimed
reforming
procedures
rather
precluding
speech
undercut
respondents
argument
provision
inevitably
utilized
tool
invidious
viewpoint
discrimination
cases
struck
legislation
facially
unconstitutional
dangers
evident
substantial
paul
example
invalidated
face
municipal
ordinance
defined
criminal
offense
placement
symbol
public
private
property
one
knows
reasonable
grounds
know
arouses
anger
alarm
resentment
others
basis
race
color
creed
religion
gender
see
id
provision
set
forth
clear
penalty
proscribed
views
particular
disfavored
subjects
id
suppressed
distinctive
idea
conveyed
distinctive
message
id
contrast
decency
respect
criteria
silence
speakers
expressly
threaten
ing
censorship
ideas
see
ibid
thus
perceive
realistic
danger
compromise
first
amendment
values
respondents
arguments
demonstrate
considerations
provision
introduces
nature
engender
kind
directed
viewpoint
discrimination
prompt
invalidate
statute
face
respondents
assert
example
ne
find
two
people
agree
beliefs
values
american
public
much
less
whether
particular
work
art
claim
ecency
likely
mean
something
different
septegenarian
tuscaloosa
teenager
las
vegas
brief
respondents
nea
likewise
views
considerations
enumerated
susceptible
multiple
interpretations
see
department
interior
related
agencies
appropriations
hearing
subcommittee
interior
related
agencies
house
committee
appropriations
testimony
john
frohnmayer
one
individual
wise
enough
able
consider
general
standards
decency
diverse
values
beliefs
american
people
group
decisions
accordingly
provision
introduce
considerations
practice
effectively
preclude
punish
expression
particular
views
indeed
one
hardly
anticipate
decency
respect
bear
grant
applications
categories
funding
symphony
orchestras
respondents
claim
provision
facially
unconstitutional
may
reduced
argument
crite
ria
sufficiently
subjective
agency
utilize
engage
viewpoint
discrimination
given
varied
interpretations
criteria
vague
exhortation
take
consideration
seems
unlikely
provision
introduce
greater
element
selectivity
determination
artistic
excellence
reluctant
event
invalidate
legislation
basis
hypothetical
application
situations
fcc
pacifica
foundation
nea
enabling
statute
contemplates
number
indisputably
constitutional
applications
decency
prong
reference
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
educational
programs
central
nea
mission
see
americans
receive
school
background
preparation
arts
humanities
listing
projects
productions
encourage
public
knowledge
education
understanding
appreciation
arts
among
nea
funding
priorities
national
endowment
arts
fy
application
guidelines
describing
education
access
category
brief
arts
broadcast
library
museum
publishing
amici
curiae
citing
nea
strategic
plan
fy
identifies
children
festivals
museums
art
education
youth
projects
artists
schools
examples
nea
activities
well
established
decency
permissible
factor
educational
suitability
motivates
consideration
board
island
trees
union
free
school
dist
pico
see
also
bethel
school
dist
fraser
surely
highly
appropriate
function
public
school
education
prohibit
use
vulgar
offensive
terms
public
discourse
permissible
applications
mandate
consider
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
also
apparent
setting
forth
purposes
nea
congress
explained
vital
democracy
honor
preserve
multicultural
artistic
heritage
agency
expressly
takes
diversity
account
giving
special
consideration
projects
productions
reach
reflect
culture
minority
inner
city
rural
tribal
community
well
projects
generally
emphasize
cultural
diversity
respondents
contend
criteria
impermissibly
applied
may
justified
statute
contemplates
respect
project
intended
audience
recognize
course
reference
permissible
applications
alone
sufficient
sustain
statute
respondents
first
amendment
challenge
neither
persuaded
applications
language
give
rise
suppression
protected
expression
contentbased
considerations
may
taken
account
process
consequence
nature
arts
funding
nea
limited
resources
must
deny
majority
grant
applications
receives
including
many
propose
artistically
excellent
projects
agency
may
decide
fund
particular
projects
wide
variety
reasons
technical
proficiency
artist
creativity
work
anticipated
public
interest
appreciation
work
work
contemporary
relevance
educational
value
suitability
appeal
special
audiences
children
disabled
service
rural
isolated
community
even
simply
work
increase
public
knowledge
art
form
brief
petitioners
dissent
noted
impossible
highly
selective
grant
program
without
denying
money
large
amount
constitutionally
protected
expres
sion
kleinfeld
dissenting
assumption
nea
grants
awarded
according
artistic
worth
competing
applications
absolute
neutrality
simply
inconceivable
advocates
arts
thomson
cert
denied
respondent
reliance
decision
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
therefore
misplaced
rosenberger
public
university
declined
authorize
disbursements
student
activities
fund
finance
printing
christian
student
newspaper
held
subsidizing
student
activities
fund
university
created
limited
public
forum
impermissibly
excluded
publications
religious
editorial
viewpoints
id
although
scarcity
nea
funding
distinguish
case
rosenberger
see
id
competitive
process
according
grants
allocated
context
arts
funding
contrast
many
subsidies
government
indiscriminately
encourage
diversity
views
private
speakers
id
nea
mandate
make
aesthetic
judgments
inherently
excellence
threshold
nea
support
sets
apart
subsidy
issue
rosenberger
available
student
organizations
educational
purpose
university
id
comparably
objective
decisions
allocating
public
benefits
access
school
auditorium
municipal
theater
see
lamb
chapel
center
moriches
union
free
school
southeastern
promotions
conrad
second
class
mailing
privileges
available
newspapers
periodical
publications
see
hannegan
esquire
respondents
allege
discrimination
par
ticular
funding
decision
fact
filing
suit
challenge
two
individual
respondents
received
nea
grants
see
exhibit
heins
declaration
record
doc
nos
letters
nea
informing
respondents
hughes
miller
awarded
solo
performance
theater
artist
fellowships
thus
occasion
address
challenge
situation
denial
grant
may
shown
product
invidious
viewpoint
discrimination
nea
leverage
power
award
subsidies
basis
subjective
criteria
penalty
disfavored
viewpoints
confront
different
case
stated
even
provision
subsidies
government
may
ai
suppression
dangerous
ideas
regan
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
subsidy
manipulated
coercive
effect
relief
appropriate
see
arkansas
writers
project
ragland
scalia
dissenting
see
also
leathers
medlock
ifferential
taxation
first
amendment
speakers
constitutionally
suspect
threatens
suppress
expression
particular
ideas
viewpoints
addition
nea
concedes
pressing
constitutional
question
arise
government
funding
resulted
imposition
disproportionate
burden
calculated
drive
certain
ideas
viewpoints
marketplace
simon
schuster
members
state
crime
victims
see
brief
petitioners
unless
applied
manner
raises
concern
suppression
disfavored
viewpoints
however
uphold
constitutionality
provision
cf
red
lion
broadcasting
fcc
pass
upon
constitutionality
regulations
envisioning
extreme
applications
conceivable
deal
problems
arise
internal
citation
omitted
finally
although
first
amendment
certainly
application
subsidy
context
note
government
may
allocate
competitive
funding
according
criteria
impermissible
direct
regulation
speech
criminal
penalty
stake
long
legislation
infringe
constitutionally
protected
rights
congress
wide
latitude
set
spending
priorities
see
regan
taxation
representation
amendments
incorporated
congress
modified
declaration
purpose
nea
enabling
act
provide
arts
funding
contribute
public
support
confidence
use
taxpayer
funds
ublic
funds
must
ultimately
serve
public
purposes
congress
defines
held
rust
congress
may
selectively
fund
program
encourage
certain
activities
believes
public
interest
without
time
funding
alternative
program
seeks
deal
problem
another
way
government
discriminated
basis
viewpoint
merely
chosen
fund
one
activity
exclusion
ibid
see
also
maher
roe
basic
difference
direct
state
interference
protected
activity
state
encouragement
alternative
activity
consonant
legislative
policy
iii
lower
courts
also
erred
invalidating
unconstitutionally
vague
first
fifth
amendments
speakers
protected
arbitrary
discriminatory
enforcement
vague
standards
seenaacp
button
terms
provision
undeniably
opaque
appeared
criminal
statute
regulatory
scheme
raise
substantial
vagueness
concerns
unlikely
however
speakers
compelled
steer
far
clear
forbidden
area
context
grants
nature
compare
board
airport
los
angeles
jews
jesus
facially
invalidating
flat
ban
first
amendment
activities
airport
hoffman
estates
flipside
hoffman
estates
prohibitory
stigmatizing
effect
ordinance
relevant
vagueness
analysis
grayned
city
rockford
requiring
clear
lines
lawful
unlawful
conduct
recognize
practical
matter
artists
may
conform
speech
believe
criteria
order
acquire
funding
see
statement
charlotte
murphy
executive
director
naao
reprinted
app
government
acting
patron
rather
sovereign
consequences
imprecision
constitutionally
severe
context
selective
subsidies
always
feasible
congress
legislate
clarity
indeed
statute
unconstitutionally
vague
government
programs
awarding
scholarships
grants
basis
subjective
criteria
excellence
see
establishing
congressional
award
program
promote
initiative
achievement
excellence
among
youths
areas
public
service
personal
development
physical
expedition
fitness
providing
funding
national
endowment
humanities
promote
progress
scholarship
humanities
authorizing
secretary
education
award
fellowships
students
superior
ability
selected
basis
demonstrated
achievement
exceptional
promise
authorizing
award
fulbright
grants
strengthen
international
cooperative
relations
authorizing
secretary
energy
recognize
teachers
excellence
mathematics
science
education
accept
respondents
vagueness
argument
call
question
constitutionality
valuable
government
programs
countless
others
like
section
merely
adds
imprecise
considerations
already
subjective
selection
process
face
impermissibly
infringe
first
fifth
amendment
rights
accordingly
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
national
endowment
arts
et
al
petitioners
karen
finley
etal
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
concurring
judgment
operation
success
patient
died
procedure
medicine
opinion
case
law
sustains
constitutionality
gutting
avid
congressional
opponents
provision
asked
write
separately
unlike
think
must
evaluated
written
rather
distorted
agency
meant
control
terms
establishes
contentand
criteria
upon
grant
applications
evaluated
perfectly
constitutional
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
tatute
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
eans
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
hat
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
ays
centuryschoolbook
section
provides
payment
shall
made
section
except
upon
application
therefor
submitted
national
endowment
arts
accordance
regulations
issued
procedures
established
chairperson
establishing
regulations
procedures
chairperson
shall
ensure
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
criteria
applications
judged
taking
consideration
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
apparent
loss
understand
mind
gutting
statute
speculates
statute
merely
advisory
ante
general
standards
decency
respect
americans
beliefs
values
must
statute
says
chairperson
shall
ensure
result
taken
account
see
american
heritage
dictionary
ed
consider
take
account
bear
mind
evaluating
applications
mean
factors
must
always
dispositive
mean
must
always
considered
method
compliance
proposed
national
endowment
arts
nea
diverse
review
panels
artists
nonartists
reflect
wide
range
geographic
cultural
obviously
inadequate
insults
intelligence
diverse
panel
membership
increases
odds
panel
takes
factors
account
reach
accurate
assessment
demand
way
increases
odds
panel
take
factors
less
ensures
panel
chairperson
duty
statute
moreover
nea
fanciful
reading
make
wholly
superfluous
section
already
requires
chairperson
issue
regulations
establish
procedures
ensure
panels
composed
extent
practicable
individuals
reflecting
diverse
artistic
cultural
points
view
statute
requires
decency
respect
factors
considered
evaluating
example
applications
relating
educational
programs
ante
intended
particular
audience
ante
violate
statute
apply
artistic
excellence
merit
requirements
select
categories
applications
violate
statute
apply
decency
respect
factors
less
universally
reviewer
may
course
give
varying
weight
factors
depending
context
categories
cases
example
funding
symphony
orchestras
ante
factors
may
rarely
ever
affect
outcome
requires
factors
considered
every
case
agree
imposes
categorical
requirement
ante
sense
require
denial
applications
violate
general
standards
decency
exhibit
disrespect
diverse
beliefs
values
americans
compare
bscenity
shall
funded
factors
need
conclusive
discriminatory
extent
particular
applicant
exhibits
disrespect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
fails
comport
general
standards
decency
likelihood
receive
grant
diminishes
words
presence
tak
consideration
clause
regarded
mere
surplusage
means
something
potter
something
decisionmaker
else
equal
favor
applications
display
decency
respect
disfavor
applications
unquestionably
constitutes
viewpoint
discrimination
conclusion
altered
fact
statute
compe
denial
funding
ante
provision
imposing
handicap
black
applicants
civil
service
jobs
saved
race
discrimination
fact
compel
rejection
black
applicants
viewpoint
discrimination
context
unconstitutional
point
shall
address
anon
law
invalid
unless
situations
decency
respect
factors
constitute
viewpoint
discrimination
none
applicant
displays
decency
onformity
prevailing
standards
propriety
modesty
american
heritage
dictionary
ed
def
applicant
displays
respect
deferential
regard
diverse
beliefs
values
american
people
def
always
edge
applicant
displays
opposite
finally
conclusion
viewpoint
discrimination
affected
fact
constitutes
decency
diverse
beliefs
values
american
people
difficult
pin
ante
preference
favor
display
values
rendered
nondiscriminatory
fact
plenty
room
argument
values
might
political
context
surrounding
adoption
respect
clause
discusses
length
ante
change
meaning
affect
constitutionality
proved
various
statements
quotes
report
independent
commission
floor
debates
provision
meant
categorically
exclude
particular
viewpoint
conceded
plain
text
language
meant
anything
unconstitutional
way
propels
leap
countertextual
conclusion
provision
merely
aimed
reforming
procedures
utilized
tool
invidious
viewpoint
discrimination
ante
evident
legislative
history
prompted
directed
public
funding
offensive
productions
serrano
piss
christ
portrayal
crucifix
immersed
urine
mapplethorpe
show
lurid
homoerotic
photographs
thus
even
one
strays
beyond
plain
text
perfectly
clear
statute
meant
discriminate
productions
ban
funding
absolutely
sure
though
shall
discuss
also
unconstitutional
make
funding
difficult
fundamentally
course
legislative
history
valid
claim
upon
attention
virtual
certainty
members
congress
voted
language
knew
agreed
various
statements
culled
report
independent
commission
floor
debate
probably
conducted
almost
empty
floor
wholly
irrelevant
statute
bipartisan
proposal
introduced
counterweight
alternative
proposal
directly
restrict
funding
basis
viewpoint
see
ante
judge
statutes
surveying
scene
accident
one
reviewed
basis
much
worse
basis
says
see
estate
romani
slip
scalia
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
matters
whether
enactment
product
partisan
alignment
history
whether
upon
passage
members
linked
arms
sang
get
together
happier
consonant
scheme
government
inquire
motives
legislators
tenney
brandhove
law
issue
case
found
text
passed
houses
signed
president
art
law
unquestionably
disrespect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
people
turn
whether
viewpoint
discrimination
violates
constitution
ii
centuryschoolbook
hat
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
tatute
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
ays
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
centuryschoolbook
onstitutional
centuryschoolbook
devotes
much
opinion
explaining
statute
means
something
says
neglects
cite
constitutional
text
governing
analysis
first
amendment
reads
congress
shall
make
law
abridging
freedom
speech
amdt
emphasis
added
abridge
contract
diminish
deprive
sheridan
complete
dictionary
english
language
ed
enactment
congress
abridge
speech
disdain
beliefs
values
american
public
abridge
indecent
speech
wish
create
indecent
disrespectful
art
unconstrained
enactment
statute
artistes
respondents
remain
entirely
free
les
bourgeois
merely
deprived
additional
satisfaction
bourgeoisie
taxed
pay
preposterous
equate
denial
taxpayer
subsidy
measures
aimed
suppression
dangerous
ideas
regan
taxation
representation
emphasis
added
quoting
cammarano
turn
quoting
speiser
randall
reason
denial
participation
tax
exemption
subsidy
scheme
necessarily
fundamental
right
direct
restriction
denial
general
rule
significant
coercive
effect
arkansas
writers
project
ragland
scalia
dissenting
one
might
contend
suppose
threat
rejection
available
source
free
money
constitute
coercion
hence
abridgment
within
meaning
first
amendment
cf
norwood
harrison
agree
contention
make
nea
mandatory
patron
art
indecent
disrespectful
even
kitsch
attract
private
support
even
one
accepts
contention
application
nea
far
sole
source
funding
indecent
disrespectful
plain
bad
art
accordingly
government
may
earmark
nea
funds
projects
deems
public
interest
without
thereby
abridging
speech
regan
taxation
representation
supra
section
discriminatory
less
constitutional
virtually
every
piece
funding
legislation
enacted
congress
government
without
violating
constitution
selectively
fund
program
encourage
certain
activities
believes
public
interest
without
time
funding
alternative
program
rust
sullivan
noted
rust
congress
chose
establish
national
endowment
democracy
constitutionally
required
fund
programs
encouraging
competing
philosophies
example
funding
discrimination
cuts
much
closer
one
core
political
speech
primary
concern
first
amendment
see
id
takes
particularly
high
degree
chutzpah
nea
contradict
proposition
since
agency
required
law
favor
artistic
opposed
scientific
political
theological
expression
common
folk
even
great
minds
matter
think
good
idea
john
marshall
told
john
adams
recent
immigration
frenchmen
include
talented
artists
adams
denounced
frenchmen
especially
painters
poets
warned
marshall
fine
arts
like
germs
infected
healthy
constitutions
ellis
revolution
profiles
early
american
culture
surely
nea
nothing
less
institutionalized
discrimination
point
view
nonetheless
constitutional
congressional
determination
favor
decency
respect
beliefs
values
opposite
favoritism
abridge
anyone
freedom
speech
respondents
relying
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
argue
discrimination
impermissible
unless
government
speaker
government
disburs
ing
public
funds
private
entities
convey
governmental
message
ibid
impossible
imagine
one
think
directly
involving
government
viewpoint
discrimination
unconstitutional
make
situation
even
worse
respondents
mistaken
business
government
favor
disfavor
points
view
modern
times
least
innumerable
subjectswhich
main
reason
decided
elect
run
government
rather
save
money
making
posts
hereditary
makes
bit
difference
insofar
either
common
sense
constitution
concerned
whether
officials
democracy
favored
point
view
achieving
directly
artists
paint
pictures
example
doc
tors
perform
abortions
advocating
officially
establishing
office
art
appreciation
example
office
voluntary
population
control
giving
money
others
achieve
advocate
funding
private
art
classes
example
planned
parenthood
none
anything
abridging
anyone
speech
rosenberger
explains
ante
found
viewpoint
discrimination
unconstitutional
funding
private
speech
involved
government
established
limited
public
nea
granting
highly
selective
highly
discriminating
awards
bears
resemblance
nub
difference
regard
distinction
abridging
speech
funding
fundamental
divide
side
first
amendment
inapplicable
contrast
seems
believe
first
amendment
despite
words
ineffable
effect
upon
funding
imposing
constraints
indeterminate
nature
announces
without
troubling
enunciate
particular
test
violated
statute
accurately
violated
quite
different
emasculated
statute
imagines
government
says
may
allocate
competitive
funding
according
criteria
impermissible
direct
regulation
speech
criminal
penalty
stake
ante
government
think
may
allocate
competitive
noncompetitive
funding
ad
libitum
insofar
first
amendment
concerned
finally
true
first
amendment
also
true
constitutional
rule
vague
legislation
application
funding
insofar
bears
upon
first
amendment
concerns
vagueness
doctrine
addresses
problems
arise
government
regulation
expressive
conduct
see
grayned
city
rockford
government
grant
programs
former
context
vagueness
produces
abridgment
lawful
speech
latter
produces
worst
waste
money
refrain
observing
however
vagueness
doctrine
applicable
agency
charged
making
grants
statutory
standard
artistic
excellence
thought
standard
met
everything
playing
beethoven
depiction
crucifix
immersed
dubious
constitutional
validity
decency
respect
limitations
respondents
demand
judged
strict
standard
artistic
excellence
humorlessness
call
vague
laudatory
description
accomplishments
nea
ante
notes
satisfaction
handful
agency
roughly
awards
generated
formal
complaints
ante
congress
felt
necessary
enact
evidently
thought
much
noteworthy
money
exacted
american
taxpayers
used
produce
crucifix
immersed
urine
display
homoerotic
photographs
secret
provision
prompted
directed
funding
offensive
productions
instead
banning
funding
productions
absolutely
think
entirely
constitutional
congress
took
lesser
step
requiring
disfavored
evaluation
grant
applications
opinion
today
renders
even
lesser
step
nullity
reason
concur
judgment
national
endowment
arts
et
al
petitioners
karen
finley
etal
writ
certiorari
appeals
ninth
circuit
june
justice
souter
dissenting
question
whether
italicized
segment
statute
unconstitutional
face
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
criteria
applications
grants
national
endowment
arts
judged
taking
consideration
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
emphasis
added
decency
respect
proviso
mandates
viewpointbased
decisions
disbursement
government
subsidies
government
wholly
failed
explain
statute
afforded
exemption
fundamental
rule
first
amendment
viewpoint
discrimination
exercise
public
authority
expressive
activity
unconstitutional
conclusions
proviso
viewpoint
based
regulation
nea
may
permissibly
engage
discrimination
patently
mistaken
may
question
raised
answered
government
favor
assumption
constitutional
applications
statute
enough
satisfy
demand
facial
constitutionality
leaving
claims
proviso
obvious
invalidity
dealt
later
response
challenges
specific
applications
discriminatory
standards
assumption
irreconcilable
long
standing
sensible
doctrine
facial
overbreadth
applicable
claims
brought
first
amendment
speech
clause
respectfully
dissent
bedrock
principle
underlying
first
amendment
government
may
prohibit
expression
idea
simply
society
finds
idea
offensive
disagreeable
texas
johnson
bove
else
first
amendment
means
government
power
restrict
expression
message
ideas
police
dept
chicago
mosley
say
principle
viewpoint
neutrality
underlies
first
amendment
bose
consumers
union
principle
applies
affirmative
suppression
speech
also
disqualification
government
favors
congress
generally
permitted
pivot
discrimination
otherwise
protected
speech
offensiveness
unacceptability
views
expresses
see
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
public
university
student
activities
funds
may
disbursed
terms
lamb
chapel
center
moriches
union
free
school
access
public
school
property
may
withheld
basis
viewpoint
leathers
medlock
ifferential
taxation
first
amendment
speakers
constitutionally
suspect
threatens
suppress
expression
particular
ideas
viewpoints
pacific
gas
elec
public
util
access
public
utility
billing
envelopes
must
viewpoint
based
members
city
council
los
angeles
taxpayers
vincent
first
amendment
forbids
government
regulate
speech
ways
favor
viewpoints
ideas
expense
others
goes
without
saying
artistic
expression
lies
within
first
amendment
protection
see
hurley
gay
lesbian
bisexual
group
boston
remarking
examples
painting
music
poetry
unquestionably
shielded
ward
rock
racism
music
form
expression
communication
protected
first
amendment
schad
mount
ephraim
entertainment
well
political
ideological
speech
protected
motion
pictures
programs
broadcast
radio
television
live
entertainment
musical
dramatic
works
fall
within
first
amendment
guarantee
kaplan
california
ictures
films
paintings
drawings
engravings
first
amendment
protection
constitutional
protection
artistic
works
turns
political
significance
may
attributable
productions
though
may
indeed
comment
political
simply
expressive
character
falls
within
spectrum
protected
speech
extending
outward
core
overtly
political
declarations
put
differently
art
entitled
full
protection
cultural
life
like
native
politics
rests
upon
ideal
governmental
viewpoint
neutrality
turner
broadcasting
system
fcc
called
upon
vindicate
ideal
characteristically
begin
asking
whether
government
adopted
regulation
speech
disagreement
message
conveys
government
purpose
controlling
consideration
ward
rock
racism
supra
citation
omitted
answer
case
damning
one
need
nothing
read
text
statute
conclude
congress
purpose
imposing
decency
respect
criteria
prevent
funding
art
conveys
offensive
message
decency
respect
provision
face
quintessentially
viewpoint
based
quotations
congressional
record
merely
confirm
obvious
legislative
purpose
words
cosponsor
bill
enacted
proviso
orks
deeply
offend
sensibilities
significant
portions
public
supported
public
funds
cong
rec
another
supporter
bill
observed
endowment
support
artists
like
robert
mapplethorpe
andre
serrano
offended
angered
many
citizens
behooving
congress
listen
complaints
nea
make
sure
exhibits
like
funded
indeed
question
congress
mind
definitive
answer
comes
succinctly
accurate
remark
proviso
author
bill
add
criteria
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
shell
screen
viewpoint
must
constantly
taken
account
ii
face
clear
legislative
purpose
plainly
expressed
work
cut
seeking
constitutional
reading
statute
see
edward
debartolo
florida
gulf
coast
building
constr
trades
council
says
first
phrase
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
imprecise
capable
multiple
interpretations
considerations
provision
introduces
nature
engender
kind
directed
viewpoint
discrimination
prompt
invalidate
statute
face
ante
unquestioned
case
law
however
clearly
contrary
sexual
expression
indecent
obscene
protected
first
amendment
statute
disfavoring
speech
fails
respect
america
diverse
beliefs
values
model
viewpoint
discrimination
penalizes
view
disrespectful
belief
value
espoused
someone
american
populace
boiled
practical
essence
limitation
obviously
means
art
disrespects
ideology
opinions
convictions
significant
segment
american
public
disfavored
whereas
art
reinforces
values
whole
point
proviso
make
sure
works
like
serrano
ostensibly
blasphemous
portrayal
jesus
funded
see
supra
reverent
treatment
conventionally
respectful
christian
sensibilities
run
afoul
law
nothing
viewpoint
based
cf
rosenberger
statute
targeting
prohibited
per
spective
general
subject
matter
religion
viewpoint
based
eichman
striking
statute
impermissibly
prohibited
speech
disrespectful
flag
fact
statute
disfavors
art
insufficiently
respectful
america
diverse
beliefs
values
alters
conclusion
one
whit
first
amendment
validate
ambition
disqualify
many
disrespectful
viewpoints
instead
merely
one
see
rosenberger
supra
another
alternative
avoiding
unconstitutionality
appears
regard
favor
government
argument
nea
may
comply
merely
populating
advisory
panels
analyze
grant
applications
members
diverse
backgrounds
see
ante
easy
asserted
implementation
law
fails
even
reflec
plausible
construction
plain
language
statute
rust
sullivan
government
notes
actually
provides
establishing
regulations
procedures
chairperson
nea
shall
ensure
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
criteria
applications
judged
taking
consideration
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
according
government
language
requires
decency
respect
considered
judging
applications
making
regulations
chairperson
takes
decency
respect
consideration
regulations
ensuring
diverse
panels
statute
satisfied
take
great
act
find
plausibility
reading
reference
considering
decency
respect
occurs
subparagraph
speaking
criteria
appli
cations
judged
preamble
directing
chairperson
adopt
regulations
judging
applications
decency
respect
obviously
considered
surprise
government
reading
directly
contradicted
legislative
history
according
provision
author
decency
respect
proviso
mandates
awarding
funds
award
process
general
standards
decency
must
accorded
cong
rec
cosponsor
bill
put
decisions
artistic
excellence
must
take
consideration
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
government
offers
variant
argument
suggesting
even
nea
must
take
decency
respect
account
active
review
applications
may
satisfy
statute
indirect
way
natural
behavior
diversely
constituted
panels
indeed
apparently
position
chairperson
nea
since
shortly
legislation
first
passed
problems
position
obvious
first
defies
statute
plain
language
suggest
nea
complies
law
merely
allowing
decency
respect
way
subconscious
inclinations
panel
members
aking
consideration
conscious
activity
see
webster
new
international
dictionary
ed
defining
take
consideration
make
allowance
judging
id
defining
consideration
ct
process
considering
continuous
careful
thought
examination
deliberation
attention
id
defining
consider
think
care
bear
mind
second
even
assuming
diverse
panel
composition
produce
sufficient
response
proviso
merely
mean
selection
decency
respect
occur
derivatively
inclinations
panel
members
instead
directly
intentional
application
criteria
end
day
proviso
still
serve
purpose
screen
offending
artistic
works
still
unconstitutional
finally
less
obvious
equally
dispositive
response
reading
statute
mandate
may
satisfied
merely
selecting
diverse
panels
renders
essentially
redundant
provides
review
panels
must
comprise
individuals
reflecting
wide
geographic
ethnic
minority
representation
well
individuals
reflecting
diverse
artistic
cultural
points
view
statutory
interpretations
render
superfluous
provisions
enactment
strongly
disfavored
freytag
commissioner
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
third
try
avoiding
constitutional
problems
disclaimer
constitutional
issue
ection
adds
grantmaking
process
preclude
awards
projects
might
deemed
place
conditions
grants
even
specify
factors
must
given
particular
weight
reviewing
application
ante
since
admonishes
nea
merely
take
respect
consideration
ante
make
funding
decisions
specifically
grounds
sees
constitutional
difficulty
fair
reading
statute
read
anything
viewpoint
based
requiring
nothing
diverse
review
panels
read
tolerating
awards
spread
indecency
disrespect
long
review
panel
national
counsel
arts
chairperson
given
thought
offending
qualities
decided
underwrite
way
presumably
prompted
congressional
outrage
first
place
nothing
naive
representative
said
voted
bill
tolerate
wasting
federal
funds
sexually
explicit
photographs
sacrilegious
works
cong
rec
even
found
view
consideration
plausible
make
difference
question
constitutionality
statute
required
panel
apply
criteria
taking
consideration
centrality
christianity
american
cultural
experience
taking
consideration
whether
artist
communist
taking
consideration
political
message
conveyed
art
even
taking
consideration
superiority
white
race
hold
considerations
facially
constitutional
merely
statute
requirement
give
particular
much
less
controlling
weight
assume
instances
hold
first
amendment
bars
government
considering
viewpoint
decides
whether
subsidize
private
speech
statute
mandates
consideration
viewpoint
quite
obviously
unconstitutional
cf
dawson
delaware
holding
first
amendment
forbids
reliance
defendant
abstract
beliefs
sentencing
even
considered
one
factor
among
many
ozonoff
berzak
breyer
holding
executive
order
provided
person
political
associations
may
considered
determining
security
clearance
violated
first
amendment
section
statute
iii
second
basic
strand
treatment
today
question
see
ante
heart
justice
scalia
see
ante
effect
assumes
whether
statute
mandates
viewpoint
discrimination
constitutional
issue
government
art
subsidies
fall
within
zone
activity
free
first
amendment
restraints
government
calls
attention
roles
government
course
entitled
engage
viewpoint
discrimination
food
drug
administration
launches
advertising
campaign
subject
smoking
may
condemn
habit
without
also
show
cowboy
taking
puff
opposite
page
secretary
defense
wishes
buy
portrait
decorate
pentagon
free
prefer
george
washington
george
third
government
freely
admits
however
neither
speaks
expression
subsidized
nea
buys
anything
nea
grants
contrary
believing
arts
reflect
high
place
accorded
american
people
nation
rich
cultural
heritage
vital
mocracy
provide
financial
assistance
artists
organizations
support
work
government
acts
patron
financially
underwriting
production
art
private
artists
impresarios
independent
consumption
accordingly
government
us
liberate
first
amendment
strictures
placing
squarely
within
categories
recognizing
new
category
analogy
accepted
ones
analogy
however
poor
fit
patronage
falls
embarrassingly
wrong
side
line
division
reflected
quite
clearly
precedents
drawing
notion
held
rust
sullivan
government
entitled
appropriate
public
funds
promotion
particular
choices
among
alternatives
offered
health
social
service
providers
family
planning
without
resort
abortion
government
promotes
particular
governmental
program
entitled
define
limits
program
dictate
viewpoint
expressed
speakers
paid
participate
ibid
added
important
qualifying
language
suggest
funding
government
even
coupled
freedom
fund
recipients
speak
outside
scope
project
invariably
sufficient
justify
government
control
content
expression
id
indeed
outside
contexts
held
time
time
congress
may
discriminate
invidiously
subsidies
way
aim
suppression
ideas
regan
taxation
representation
internal
quotation
marks
brackets
omitted
see
also
lamb
chapel
government
subsidizes
private
speech
may
favor
viewpoints
ideas
expense
others
hannegan
esquire
postmaster
general
may
deny
subsidies
certain
periodicals
ground
morally
improper
public
welfare
public
good
thorough
statement
principles
found
recent
case
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
held
university
virginia
discriminate
viewpoint
underwriting
speech
publications
recognized
government
may
act
basis
viewpoint
state
speaker
state
disburses
public
funds
private
entities
convey
governmental
message
id
explained
government
may
act
viewpoint
speak
subsidize
transmittal
message
favors
instead
expends
funds
encourage
diversity
views
private
speakers
id
government
acts
patron
subsidizing
expression
others
may
prefer
one
lawfully
stated
view
another
rosenberger
controls
nea
like
student
activities
fund
rosenberger
subsidy
scheme
created
encourage
expression
diversity
views
private
speakers
congress
brought
nea
help
americans
achieve
better
understanding
past
better
analysis
present
better
view
future
nea
purpose
support
new
ideas
help
create
sustain
climate
encouraging
freedom
thought
imagination
inquiry
see
also
intent
act
encouragement
free
inquiry
expression
committee
report
accompanying
bill
reauthorize
amend
nea
governing
statute
preamble
act
directs
endownment
programs
open
richly
diverse
reflecting
ferment
ideas
always
made
nation
strong
free
given
congressional
choice
sustain
freedom
expression
rosenberger
teaches
first
amendment
forbids
decisions
based
viewpoint
popularity
long
congress
chooses
subsidize
expressive
endeavors
large
business
requiring
nea
turn
funding
applications
artists
exhibitors
devote
freedom
thought
imagination
inquiry
defying
tastes
beliefs
values
may
use
nea
purse
suppres
dangerous
ideas
regan
taxation
representation
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
says
otherwise
claiming
distinguish
rosenberger
ground
student
activities
funds
case
generally
available
applicants
whereas
nea
funds
disbursed
selectively
competitively
choice
ante
rosenberger
anticipated
specifically
rejected
distinction
held
uncertain
terms
government
justify
viewpoint
discrimination
among
private
speakers
economic
fact
scarcity
scarce
money
demands
choices
course
choices
acceptable
viewpoint
neutral
principle
like
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
nothing
decision
indicate
scarcity
give
state
right
exercise
viewpoint
discrimination
otherwise
impermissible
ibid
see
also
arkansas
ed
television
forbes
slip
scarcity
air
time
justify
exclusion
candidates
debate
public
television
neutral
selection
criteria
must
employed
student
activities
fund
issue
rosenberger
awarded
competitive
grants
even
applicants
basis
journalistic
merit
taking
consideration
message
newspaper
obvious
beyond
peradventure
come
differently
leaving
university
free
refuse
funding
considering
publication
christian
perspective
word
said
finally
proposed
alternative
failed
analogy
solicitor
general
put
oral
argument
something
unique
government
funding
arts
first
amendment
purposes
tr
oral
arg
however
different
governmental
patron
may
governmental
speaker
buyer
argument
goes
patronage
also
singularly
different
traditional
regulation
speech
limitations
placed
latter
place
applied
viewpoint
discrimination
distributing
patronage
two
answers
first
rosenberger
forecloses
claim
nea
first
amendment
issues
arise
somehow
unique
even
rosenberger
even
thought
nea
program
patronage
truly
singular
hesitate
reject
government
plea
recognize
new
categorical
patronage
exemption
requirement
viewpoint
neutrality
reject
simple
reason
government
offered
nothing
justify
recognition
new
exempt
category
question
burden
justify
categorical
exemption
never
explicitly
addressed
despite
recognition
speaker
buyer
categories
past
answer
nonetheless
obvious
recent
statement
synthesizing
host
cases
viewpoint
discrimination
first
amendment
presumptively
places
sort
discrimination
beyond
power
government
simon
schuster
members
state
crime
victims
takes
something
defeat
presumption
burden
necessarily
government
justify
new
exception
fundamental
rules
give
life
first
amendment
government
explain
sphere
governmental
participation
arts
unique
treated
outside
traditional
first
amendment
limits
government
carried
burden
even
squarely
faced
iv
although
like
recognize
facial
challenges
legislation
generally
disfavored
dallas
proviso
type
statute
obviously
lends
attack
nea
offer
list
reasons
denies
grant
application
artist
exhibitor
whose
subject
raises
hint
controversy
never
know
sure
whether
decency
respect
criteria
played
part
decision
nea
deny
funding
hence
hope
waiting
asapplied
challenge
plaintiff
whose
rejected
proposal
raised
risk
offense
aimed
exhibition
forum
decency
respect
might
serve
permissible
selection
criteria
plaintiff
sought
funding
project
sanitized
avoid
rejection
one
denied
institutional
plaintiff
national
association
artists
organizations
naao
representative
standing
behalf
potential
plaintiffs
see
app
declaration
naao
executive
director
listing
exam
ples
potentially
objectionable
works
produced
several
member
organizations
therefore
gain
nothing
dismissing
case
requiring
individuals
groups
bring
essentially
suit
restyled
challenge
raising
one
possibilities
mentioned
entertaining
challenge
finds
constitutional
face
part
number
indisputably
constitutional
applications
decency
respect
criteria
ante
hard
imagine
bear
grant
applications
categories
funding
symphony
orchestras
ante
circumstances
rejected
facial
challenges
similar
reasons
facial
challenge
legislative
act
course
difficult
challenge
mount
successfully
since
challenger
must
establish
set
circumstances
exists
act
valid
salerno
quite
apart
question
might
raised
statement
general
rule
beyond
question
freely
concedes
application
well
settled
general
rule
limit
challenges
brought
first
amendment
speech
clause
exception
th
rule
recognized
jurisprudence
facial
challenge
based
upon
first
amendment
grounds
applied
statutes
restricting
speech
doctrine
rendering
statute
invalid
applications
facially
invalid
invalid
ada
guam
society
obstetricians
gynecologists
scalia
dissenting
denial
certiorari
see
reno
american
civil
liberties
union
striking
decency
provision
communications
decency
act
facially
overbroad
id
slip
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
declining
apply
rule
salerno
plaintiffs
claim
arose
first
amendment
schad
mount
ephraim
appellants
claims
rooted
first
amendment
entitled
raise
overbreadth
challenge
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
gooding
wilson
thus
routinely
understood
overbreadth
doctrine
apply
plaintiff
mounts
facial
challenge
law
investing
government
discretion
discriminate
viewpoint
parcels
benefits
support
speech
see
city
lakewood
plain
dealer
publishing
facial
challenge
lies
whenever
licensing
law
gives
government
official
agency
substantial
power
discriminate
based
content
viewpoint
speech
suppressing
disfavored
speech
disliked
speakers
forsyth
county
nationalist
movement
applying
overbreadth
doctrine
invalidate
face
ordinance
allowing
discrimination
awarding
parade
permits
sure
facial
challenge
succeed
unless
statute
overbroad
new
york
state
club
city
new
york
mean
law
invalidated
overbreadth
unless
reaches
substantial
number
impermissible
applications
new
york
ferber
impediment
invalidation
speculates
decency
criterion
might
permissibly
applied
applications
seeking
create
display
art
schools
children
museums
whereas
respect
criterion
might
permissibly
applied
applications
seeking
create
art
celebrates
minority
tribal
rural
culture
even
certainly
case
challenged
statute
reaches
substantial
number
impermissible
applications
one
statute
legitimate
reach
dwarfs
arguably
impermissible
applications
contrary
nothing
record
suggests
grant
scheme
administered
broad
authorization
nea
governing
statute
see
devotes
overwhelming
proportion
resources
schools
ethnic
commemoration
since
decency
respect
criteria
may
employed
many
instances
art
seeking
sidy
neither
aimed
children
meant
celebrate
particular
culture
statute
facially
overbroad
cf
city
lakewood
supra
host
first
amendment
cases
considered
merits
facial
challenges
statutes
policies
embodied
discrimination
based
content
viewpoint
expression
vested
officials
discretion
threatened
even
assumed
properly
drawn
law
greatly
restricted
prohibited
manner
expression
circulation
issue
accordingly
observation
handful
permissible
applications
decency
respect
proviso
even
true
irrelevant
government
takes
different
tack
arguing
overbreadth
analysis
place
case
prospect
expressive
conduct
forms
basis
overbreadth
doctrine
see
massachusetts
oakes
plurality
opinion
present
brief
petitioners
simply
wrong
explained
prospect
denial
government
funding
necessarily
carries
potential
chil
individual
thought
expression
rosenberger
world
nea
funding
makers
exhibitors
potentially
controversial
art
either
trim
work
avoid
anything
likely
offend
refrain
seeking
nea
funding
altogether
either
way
whatever
extent
nea
eligibility
defines
national
mainstream
proviso
tend
create
timid
esthetic
either
way
proviso
viewpoint
discrimination
chill
expressive
activity
persons
forsyth
county
see
app
declaration
charlotte
murphy
executive
director
respondent
naao
recounting
naao
members
applied
nea
grants
fear
work
found
indecent
disrespectful
others
applied
chilled
applications
scope
projects
decency
respect
provision
indeed
nea
grants
often
matched
funds
private
donors
constraining
impact
significantly
magnified
chilling
effect
caused
nea
viewpointbased
selection
criteria
exacerbated
practical
realities
funding
artistic
community
plainly
stated
nea
occupies
dominant
influential
role
financial
affairs
art
world
nea
provides
much
support
conditions
require
matching
private
sources
nea
funding
involvement
project
necessarily
multiplier
effect
competitive
market
funding
artistic
endeavors
addition
funding
sources
regard
nea
award
imprimatur
signifies
recipient
artistic
merit
value
nea
grants
lend
prestige
legitimacy
projects
therefore
critical
ability
artists
companies
attract
funding
sources
grant
applicants
rely
nea
well
beyond
dollar
value
particular
grant
since
decency
respect
proviso
substantially
overbroad
carries
significant
power
chill
artistic
production
display
struck
face
strike
proviso
however
instead
preserves
irony
statutory
mandate
deny
recognition
virtually
expression
capable
causing
offense
quarter
recent
manifestation
scheme
enacted
create
sustain
climate
encouraging
freedom
thought
imagination
inquiry
footnotes
title
provides
full
payment
shall
made
section
except
upon
application
therefor
submitted
national
endowment
arts
accordance
regulations
issued
procedures
established
chairperson
establishing
regulations
procedures
chairperson
shall
ensure
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
criteria
applications
judged
taking
consideration
general
standards
decency
respect
diverse
beliefs
values
american
public
applications
consistent
purposes
section
regulations
procedures
shall
clearly
indicate
obscenity
without
artistic
merit
protected
speech
shall
funded
uncertainty
point
relates
adjective
issue
current
discussion
one
might
argue
decency
respect
factors
constitute
content
discrimination
rather
viewpoint
discrimination
render
easier
uphold
since
believe
statute
must
upheld
either
event
pass
conundrum
assume
worst
quite
well
oeuvres
four
individual
plaintiffs
case
sought
funding
described
follows
finley
controversial
show
keep
victims
ready
contains
three
segments
second
segment
finley
visually
recounts
sexual
assault
stripping
waist
smearing
chocolate
breasts
using
profanity
describe
assault
holly
hughes
monologue
without
end
somewhat
graphic
recollection
artist
realization
lesbianism
reminiscence
mother
sexuality
john
fleck
stage
performance
little
fishes
confronts
alcoholism
catholicism
course
performance
fleck
appears
dressed
mermaid
urinates
stage
creates
altar
toilet
bowl
putting
photograph
jesus
christ
lid
tim
miller
derives
performance
golden
childhood
experiences
life
homosexual
constant
threat
aids
miller
uses
vegetables
performances
represent
sexual
symbols
note
lee
rev
citations
omitted
suppose
unconstitutional
government
give
money
organization
devoted
promotion
candidates
nominated
republican
unconstitutional
government
promote
candidates
nominated
republican
party
think
unconstitutionality
anything
first
amendment
art
may
affect
public
attitudes
behavior
variety
ways
ranging
direct
espousal
political
social
doctrine
subtle
shaping
thought
characterizes
artistic
expression
joseph
burstyn
wilson
course
nothing
whatsoever
unconstitutional
view
general
matter
congress
obligation
support
artistic
enterprises
many
people
detest
first
amendment
speaks
congress
decides
participate
nation
artistic
life
legal
regulation
subsidy
scheme
like
nea
congress
choose
spend
public
funds
manner
may
discriminate
viewpoint
deciding
gets
money
subject
legislative
history
purpose
disturbing
upholds
part
statute
drafted
hope
avoiding
constitutional
objections
members
congress
proclaiming
constitutionality
congressional
floor
see
ante
like
assume
many
members
congress
believed
bill
constitutional
indeed
members
congress
must
take
oath
affirmation
support
constitution
see
art
vi
cl
presume
every
case
congress
believed
statute
consistent
constitutional
commands
see
video
impute
congress
intent
pass
legislation
inconsistent
constitution
yates
courts
allow
legislature
conclusory
belief
constitutionality
however
sincere
trump
incontrovertible
unconstitutionality
emphatically
province
duty
judicial
department
say
law
marbury
madison
cranch
recognize
explains
ante
amendment
adding
decency
respect
proviso
bipartisan
counterweight
severe
alternatives
members
congress
may
voted
simply
seemed
least
among
various
evils
see
cong
rec
happy
aspects
substitute
contains
language
concerning
standards
decency
find
troubling
applaud
williams
efforts
achieving
compromise
difficult
circumstances
support
williamscoleman
substitute
perhaps
proviso
mildest
alternative
available
simply
proves
bipartisan
push
reauthorize
nea
succeed
including
least
limitations
appreciation
alternatives
alter
fact
congress
passed
decency
respect
restrictions
knowing
intending
restrictions
prevent
future
controversies
stemming
nea
funding
inflammatory
art
projects
declaring
inflammatory
disfavored
funding
see
rust
sullivan
congress
established
national
endowment
democracy
encourage
countries
adopt
democratic
principles
constitutionally
required
fund
program
encourage
competing
lines
political
philosophy
communism
fascism
proposing
public
works
art
project
pwap
new
deal
program
hired
artists
decorate
public
buildings
president
roosevelt
allegedly
remarked
ca
lot
young
enthusiasts
painting
lenin
head
justice
building
quoted
mankin
federal
arts
patronage
new
deal
america
commitment
culture
government
arts
mulcahy
wyszomirski
eds
buying
free
take
choice
communicative
element
inherent
act
funding
rosenberger
rector
visitors
univ
souter
dissenting
endorsement
importance
arts
collectively
endorsement
individual
message
espoused
given
work
art
rust
government
create
program
encourage
private
speech
instead
used
private
speakers
transmit
specific
information
pertaining
program
recognized
government
appropriates
public
funds
promote
particular
policy
entitled
say
wishes
rosenberger
supra
citing
rust
supra
attempt
avoid
rosenberger
describing
nea
funding
terms
competition
scarcity
work
competition
implies
scarcity
without
exclusive
prize
compete
competition
merely
surrogate
scarcity
criteria
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
may
raise
intractable
issues
identification
artistic
worth
doubt
used
covertly
filter
unwanted
ideas
nothing
inherently
viewpoint
discriminatory
criteria
noted
esthetic
government
goal
perfectly
legitimate
see
metromedia
san
diego
plurality
opinion
decency
respect
hand
inherently
facially
viewpoint
based
serve
legitimate
permissible
end
assertion
mere
fact
grants
must
awarded
according
artistic
merit
precludes
absolute
neutrality
part
nea
ante
therefore
misdirected
point
government
necessarily
makes
choices
among
competing
applications
even
judgments
artistic
quality
may
branded
subjective
greater
lesser
degree
question
whether
government
may
apply
patently
criteria
making
choices
justice
scalia
suggests
rosenberger
turned
distinction
rather
fact
government
established
limited
public
forum
ante
leaving
aside
proper
application
forum
analysis
nea
projects
agree
holding
rosenberger
turned
characterizing
metaphorical
forum
public
degree
like
case
rosenberger
involved
viewpoint
discrimination
made
clear
discrimination
impermissible
forums
even
ones
cornelius
naacp
legal
defense
ed
fund
definition
government
made
public
property
generally
available
facilitate
private
speech
perry
ed
assn
perry
local
educators
defining
nonpublic
forum
ublic
property
tradition
designation
forum
public
communication
accordingly
rosenberger
brief
allusion
forum
analysis
way
determinative
holding
planned
parenthood
southeastern
casey
statute
restricting
abortion
struck
large
fraction
cases
statute
relevant
operate
substantial
obstacle
woman
choice
undergo
abortion
however
recognized
overbreadth
doctrine
apply
commercial
speech
hoffman
estates
flipside
hoffman
estates
cf
salerno
fact
bail
reform
act
might
operate
unconstitutionally
conceivable
set
circumstances
insufficient
render
wholly
invalid
since
recognized
doctrine
outside
limited
context
first
amendment
placing
emphasis
potential
applicability
decency
criterion
educational
programs
neglects
point
existence
entitled
ccess
arts
support
education
concerned
specifically
funding
arts
education
especially
elementary
secondary
schools
seems
nea
mission
promote
arts
education
ante
carried
primarily
decency
standard
might
constitutionally
permissible
applied
applications
grants
standard
appear
relevant
applications
decency
respect
provision
appears
governs
grant
applications
seemingly
concedes
isolated
constitutional
applications
fact
little
matter
speaking
specific
applications
may
valid
goes
admit
alone
sufficient
sustain
statute
ante
nonetheless
upholds
statute
persuaded
applications
language
give
rise
suppression
protected
expression
ante
conclusion
appears
rest
combination
competition
rationale
distinguishing
rosenberger
justifying
discrimination
reading
decency
respect
proviso
something
viewpoint
based
treatment
taking
consideration
establishing
firm
mandate
subject
constitutional
scrutiny
already
explained
however
fair
reading
text
attention
case
law
foreclose
reliance
let
alone
arguments
see
also
cong
rec
upport
endowmen
always
represented
housekeeping
seal
approval
helped
grantees
generate
dollars
projects
productions
agree
unconstitutionally
vague
chilling
results
imprecision
drafting
standards
artistic
excellence
artistic
merit
government
awards
scarce
grants
scholarships
inevitable
permissible
consequence
distributing
prizes
basis
criteria
dealing
subject
defies
exactness
necessary
imprecision
criteria
justifies
tolerating
degree
vagueness
might
intolerable
applying
first
amendment
attempts
regulate
political
discussion
cf
arkansas
ed
television
forbes
slip
stevens
dissenting
problem
chilling
may
naturally
result
necessarily
open
standards
unacceptable
chilling
dangerous
ideas
speiser
randall
naturally
results
explicitly
standards