October Term 2013 · Docket 13-115
Does objective safety justify moving protesters?
Protesters claim Secret Service agents moved them based on their political views. Agents argue safety concerns required the action.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Wilker argued the plaintiffs pled a plausible claim. He stated they alleged intentional viewpoint discrimination.
Mr. Gershengorn described the physical layout of the protest area. He noted the alley entry point on California Street.
Justice Kennedy asked if objective bases make motive irrelevant. He questioned the weight of subjective intent in such cases.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 13-47 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 13-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 12-16 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 12-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-1 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-1
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether officials can move protesters for safety reasons. The core issue is if subjective intent matters when objective grounds exist.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 13-47 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 13-47
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 26, 2014.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 12-16 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 12-16
What each side wants
Protesters want a ruling that subjective intent matters. They seek to prove agents acted with discriminatory motives.
Agents want a ruling that objective safety justifies action. They seek dismissal of the discrimination claims.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 13-47 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 13-47
What each side says
Protesters argue agents moved them solely due to their political views. They claim this violates core First Amendment principles.
Agents argue they acted for objective safety reasons. They contend subjective motives are irrelevant if safety grounds exist.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 13-47 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 13-47
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if objective reasons negate unconstitutional motives. He suggested the case is simple if objective grounds exist.
Justice Breyer asked if the Court should reach the intent question. He noted the distinction between ordinary police and Secret Service agents.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 12-16 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 12-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-1 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-1
Why it matters
This dispute defines the limits of government power over speech. It determines if officials can prioritize safety over viewpoint neutrality. The outcome shapes how agencies manage public demonstrations.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 13-47 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 13-47
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 12-16 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 12-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-33 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 43-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 43-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-1 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-1
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 13-47 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 13-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 13-47 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 13-47
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.