Brooks v. Auburn University
United States District Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
412 F.2d 1171 (1969)
- Written by Mike Begovic, JD
Facts
Reverend William Sloan Coffin was invited to speak at Auburn University (Auburn) (defendant) by the Human Rights Forum (plaintiff). Coffin was a chaplain at Yale University and an outspoken critic of the Vietnam War. The Public Affairs Seminar Board (the board) at Auburn, tasked with approving such requests and allocating appropriate funds, initially approved the request. However, the president of Auburn, Harry Phillip (defendant), informed the board that Coffin could not speak on campus because he was a convicted felon and might advocate lawbreaking. At the time, Auburn had no set of rules or regulations governing who could speak on campus. Philip then unilaterally crafted a set of rules governing campus speakers. Under the rules, a speaker could not be invited if they (1) could reasonably be expected to advocate breaking the law; and (2) had been convicted of a felony. Phillip conceded that he was not concerned that Coffin’s speech would lead to violence or unrest on campus. Larry Brooks, along with other faculty and students at Auburn (plaintiffs), filed a class-action lawsuit against Phillip and Auburn, seeking an injunction restraining Phillip from interfering with Coffin’s speaking appearance on campus. A district court granted the injunction. Phillip appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.