Marilyn Manson, Inc. v. New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority

971 F. Supp. 875 (1997)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Marilyn Manson, Inc. v. New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
971 F. Supp. 875 (1997)

Facts

Rock band Marilyn Manson (the band) was scheduled to perform at OzzFest ‘97, a heavy-metal music festival held at Giants Stadium. More than thirty concerts had been held at the stadium in recent years. The New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority (the Authority) (defendant), a government entity, owned and operated Giants Stadium pursuant to a statutory mandate to earn money and entertain the public. The Authority initially approved the festival but canceled it after learning that the band would be performing. In support of its decision, the Authority cited a provision in the contract governing the festival that allowed it to exclude performers whose character was offensive to public morals. Marylin Manson, Inc. (Manson) (plaintiff) sought a preliminary injunction to require the Authority to allow the band to perform, arguing that the Authority’s rejection of the band was an illegal restriction of constitutionally protected speech.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wolin, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 816,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. 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.

Here's why 816,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership