Charles W. Burson v. Mary Rebecca Freeman
504 U.S. 191 · Decided May 26, 1992 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Charles W. Burson v. Mary Rebecca Freeman was decided on May 26, 1992 by a vote of 5–3. The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice Harry A. Blackmun wrote the opinion announcing the judgment of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “First Amendment, miscellaneous” in the First Amendment area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 504 U.S. 191 · 112 S. Ct. 1846 · 119 L. Ed. 2d 5 · 1992 U.S. LEXIS 3125
- Docket number
- 90-1056
- Decided
- May 26, 1992
- Argued
- October 8, 1991
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Judgment of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–3
- Majority opinion
- Harry A. Blackmun
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- First Amendment, miscellaneous
- Issue area
- First Amendment
- Legal provision
- First Amendment (speech, press, and assembly)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Judgment of the Court | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Dissent | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice David H. Souter | Dissent |
Did not participate: Clarence Thomas.
Full case caption
Charles W. Burson, Attorney General and Reporter for Tennessee v. Mary Rebecca Freeman
SCDB identifiers: case 1991-074, docket 1991-074-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “First Amendment, miscellaneous”
- Forsyth County v. the Nationalist MovementLaw held unconstitutional
- International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Walter Lee
- Walter Lee v. International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- David Dawson v. Delaware
- Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York State Crime Victims BoardLaw held unconstitutional
- Dominic P. Gentile v. State Bar of NevadaLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: First Amendment (speech, press, and assembly)
- Rav v. City of St. PaulLaw held unconstitutional
- City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Fred H. Edenfield v. Scott FaneLaw held unconstitutional
- Michael Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc.
- Jeffrey M. Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, Inc.
- James P. Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association
Same Term, same area (First Amendment)
- Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York State Crime Victims BoardLaw held unconstitutional
- David Dawson v. Delaware
- Forsyth County v. the Nationalist MovementLaw held unconstitutional
- Rav v. City of St. PaulLaw held unconstitutional
- Robert E. Lee v. Daniel Weisman Etc.Law held unconstitutional
- International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Walter Lee
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error