From our private database of 13,300+ case briefs...
Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, Inc.
United States Supreme Court
512 U.S. 753 (1994)
Madsen (defendant) was one of a group of anti-abortion protesters enjoined by the courts of the state of Florida against picketing within a certain distance of the Women’s Health Center, Inc. (plaintiff). After finding that the protesters violated its first injunction, the court issued a new injunction that imposed expanded limitations on protest activities. The protesters challenged the injunction in state court. The state supreme court upheld the injunction. The protesters petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, C.J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Scalia, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 136,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,300 briefs, keyed to 182 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.