Laserfiche WebLink
PRESENTATION TITLE (EDIT ON MASTER)State v. Hensel•Four years later, the Minnesota Supreme Court overturned Ms. Hensel’s conviction and invalidated the disorderly conduct statute as an unconstitutional restriction on free speech–State v. Hensel, 901 N.W.2d 166 (Minn. 2017)•The Court held:–The terms “meeting,” “assembly” and “disturb” could apply to virtually any situation and thus are overbroad–The language criminalizing conduct that the speaker “reasonably” should have known would cause a disturbance is an overbroad intent requirement–The statute is not a valid time, place, or manner restriction on speech because it is not narrowly tailored—it applies to any meeting in any public or private place–There is no narrower interpretation of the law that could render it valid under the First Amendment10