InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

United States v. Albertini

The court held that the government's interest in securing military bases justified excluding people who had been ordered not to reenter.

472 U.S. 675 · No. 83-1624 · 1984 term · Burger Court

Decided Jun 24, 1985 · argued Apr 15, 1985

First Amendment · Protest demonstrations: demonstrations and other forms of protest based on First Amendment guarantees

Majority opinion: Sandra O'Connor

The voteMajorityDissent

6–36 in the majority, 3 in dissent

3 dissents (6–3)

Reversed and remanded. United States won.

What this ruling means

Reversed and remanded: the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit and sent the case back to that court for further proceedings that follow the Supreme Court’s ruling.

United States was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.

From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.

Report a correction

Summary

The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.

United States v. Albertini, 472 U.S. 675 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case about the First Amendment rights of a man who had been banned from entering a military base and later entered the base where he participated in a protest. According to the court, the base did not become a public forum just because it was holding an open house at the time. The court held that the government's interest in securing military bases justified excluding people who had been ordered not to reenter. This First Amendment holding applied a version of the test from United States v. O'Brien (1968) for content-neutral incidental burdens on speech.

Read the full article on Wikipedia

Data notes

The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1984 term. Filled: the 6 in the majority. Hollow: the 3 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianMarshallBrennanStevensBlackmunPowellWhiteO'ConnorBurgerRehnquist

Majority(6)

Dissent(3)

Data notes

Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.

Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
United StatesUnited States
Respondent
AlbertiniProtester, demonstrator, picketer or pamphleteer (non-employment related), or non-indigent loiterer
Reached the Court by
Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes

The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Provision
18 U.S.C. § 1382
Kind of law
Infrequently litigated statutes
Decided by
Statutory construction
Data notes

The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. Jun 24, 1985DecidedDecided · Decided 6–3: reversed and remanded. United States won.
  2. Apr 15, 1985ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  3. Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
  4. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit: reversed.
  5. Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the Hawaii U.S. District Court.
Data notes

From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

46 other argued cases since 1946 on protest demonstrations: demonstrations and other forms of protest based on First Amendment guarantees, newest first.

  1. Olivier v. City of Brandon, Mississippi607 U.S. 552Mar 20, 2026 · 607 U.S. 552First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  2. O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier601 U.S. 205Mar 15, 2024 · 601 U.S. 205First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  3. Lindke v. Freed601 U.S. 187Mar 15, 2024 · 601 U.S. 187First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  4. Wood v. Moss572 U.S. 744May 27, 2014 · 572 U.S. 744First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  5. Albert Snyder, Petitioner v. Fred W. Phelps, Sr., et al.Landmark · Freedom of speech and of the press562 U.S. 443Mar 2, 2011 · 562 U.S. 443First Amendment8–18–1 band

  6. Deborah Morse, et al. v. Joseph Frederick551 U.S. 393Jun 25, 2007 · 551 U.S. 393First Amendment5–45–4 band

  7. Virginia v. Barry Elton Black, Richard J. Elliott, and Jonathan O'MaraLandmark · Freedom of speech and of the press538 U.S. 343Apr 7, 2003 · 538 U.S. 343First Amendment7–27–2 band

  8. John J. Hurley and South Boston Allied War Veterans Council v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, etc., et al.Landmark · Freedom of association515 U.S. 557Jun 19, 1995 · 515 U.S. 557First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  9. Rav v. City of St. Paul, MinnesotaLandmark · Freedom of speech and of the press505 U.S. 377Jun 22, 1992 · 505 U.S. 377First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  10. United States v. Shawn D. Eichman, David Gerald Blalock and Scott W. Tyler496 U.S. 310Jun 11, 1990 · 496 U.S. 310First Amendment5–45–4 band

  11. Federal Trade Commission v. Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association et al.493 U.S. 411Jan 22, 1990 · 493 U.S. 411First Amendment6–36–3 band
  12. Texas v. JohnsonLandmark · Freedom of speech and of the press491 U.S. 397Jun 21, 1989 · 491 U.S. 397First Amendment5–45–4 band

  13. Michael Boos, J. Michael Waller and Bridget Brooker v. Marion S. Barry, Jr., Mayor, District of Columbia, et al.485 U.S. 312Mar 22, 1988 · 485 U.S. 312First Amendment5–36–3 band

  14. City of Houston, Texas v. Hill482 U.S. 451Jun 15, 1987 · 482 U.S. 451First Amendment8–18–1 band
  15. Clark, Secretary of the Interior, et al. v. Community for Creative Non-Violence et al.468 U.S. 288Jun 29, 1984 · 468 U.S. 288First Amendment7–27–2 band

  16. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People et al. v. Claiborne Hardware Co. et al.Landmark · Freedom of speech and of the press458 U.S. 886Jul 2, 1982 · 458 U.S. 886First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  17. Carey, State's Attorney of Cook County v. Brown et al.447 U.S. 455Jun 20, 1980 · 447 U.S. 455First Amendment6–36–3 band

  18. Spence v. Washington418 U.S. 405Jun 25, 1974 · 418 U.S. 405First Amendment6–36–3 band

  19. Smith, Sheriff v. Goguen415 U.S. 566Mar 25, 1974 · 415 U.S. 566First Amendment6–36–3 band

  20. Lewis v. City of New Orleans415 U.S. 130Feb 20, 1974 · 415 U.S. 130First Amendment6–36–3 band
  21. Grayned v. City of Rockford408 U.S. 104Jun 26, 1972 · 408 U.S. 104First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  22. Police Department of the City of Chicago et al. v. Mosley408 U.S. 92Jun 26, 1972 · 408 U.S. 92First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  23. Colten v. Kentucky407 U.S. 104Jun 12, 1972 · 407 U.S. 104First Amendment7–27–2 band
  24. Gooding, Warden v. Wilson405 U.S. 518Mar 23, 1972 · 405 U.S. 518First Amendment5–27–2 band
  25. Cohen v. CaliforniaLandmark · Freedom of speech and of the press403 U.S. 15Jun 7, 1971 · 403 U.S. 15First Amendment5–45–4 band

  26. Coates et al. v. City of Cincinnati402 U.S. 611Jun 1, 1971 · 402 U.S. 611First Amendment5–45–4 band

  27. Radich v. New York401 U.S. 531Mar 24, 1971 · 401 U.S. 531First Amendment4–45–4 band
  28. Schacht v. United States398 U.S. 58May 25, 1970 · 398 U.S. 58First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  29. Bachellar et al. v. Maryland397 U.S. 564Apr 20, 1970 · 397 U.S. 564First Amendment8–0Unanimous band
  30. Jones v. State Board of Education of Tennessee et al.397 U.S. 31Feb 24, 1970 · 397 U.S. 31First Amendment6–27–2 band
  31. Street v. New York394 U.S. 576Apr 21, 1969 · 394 U.S. 576First Amendment5–45–4 band

  32. Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham394 U.S. 147Mar 10, 1969 · 394 U.S. 147First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  33. Tinker et al. v. Des Moines Independent Community School District et al.Landmark · Freedom of speech and of the press393 U.S. 503Feb 24, 1969 · 393 U.S. 503First Amendment7–27–2 band
  34. United States v. O'BrienLandmark · Freedom of speech and of the press391 U.S. 367May 27, 1968 · 391 U.S. 367First Amendment7–18–1 band

  35. Cameron et al. v. Johnson, Governor of Mississippi, et al.390 U.S. 611Apr 22, 1968 · 390 U.S. 611First Amendment7–27–2 band
  36. Walker et al. v. City of Birmingham388 U.S. 307Jun 12, 1967 · 388 U.S. 307First Amendment5–45–4 band
  37. Turner et al. v. New York386 U.S. 773May 8, 1967 · 386 U.S. 773First Amendment7–27–2 band
  38. Adderley et al. v. Florida385 U.S. 39Nov 14, 1966 · 385 U.S. 39First Amendment5–45–4 band
  39. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People et al. v. Overstreet384 U.S. 118Apr 27, 1966 · 384 U.S. 118First Amendment5–45–4 band
  40. Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham382 U.S. 87Nov 15, 1965 · 382 U.S. 87First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  41. Cox v. Louisiana379 U.S. 559Jan 18, 1965 · 379 U.S. 559First Amendment5–45–4 band

  42. Cox v. Louisiana379 U.S. 536Jan 18, 1965 · 379 U.S. 536First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  43. Fields et al. v. City of Fairfield.375 U.S. 248Dec 16, 1963 · 375 U.S. 248First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  44. Edwards et al. v. South CarolinaLandmark · Freedom of petition372 U.S. 229Feb 25, 1963 · 372 U.S. 229First Amendment8–18–1 band

  45. Hughes et al. v. Superior Court of California for Contra Costa County339 U.S. 460May 8, 1950 · 339 U.S. 460First Amendment8–0Unanimous band
  46. Kovacs v. Cooper, Judge336 U.S. 77Jan 31, 1949 · 336 U.S. 77First Amendment5–45–4 band
Data notes

Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.

Report a correction

Official record

Read the full opinion on Justia, the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.