Houston Community College System v. Wilson
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Houston Community College System v. Wilson and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Houston Community College System v. Wilson.
In Houston Community College System v. Wilson, the Supreme Court addressed whether a verbal censure by an elected body violates the First Amendment. The Court found that such censure does not constitute an actionable First Amendment claim. The decision reversed the Fifth Circuit's ruling that had allowed Wilson to pursue his claim.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Houston Community College System v. Wilson.
The Court held that Mr. Wilson does not possess an actionable First Amendment claim arising from the Board's purely verbal censure.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Houston Community College System v. Wilson. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Free Speech is relevant to Houston Community College System v. Wilson
The case primarily concerns whether a verbal censure by an elected body violates the First Amendment's protection of free speech.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Mr. Wilson does not possess an actionable First Amendment claim arising from the Board's purely verbal censure.
-
Why Standing is relevant to Houston Community College System v. Wilson
The issue of standing was addressed as the District Court initially dismissed the complaint on this basis, which was later reversed by the Fifth Circuit.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The District Court granted HCC's motion to dismiss the complaint, concluding that Mr. Wilson lacked standing under Article III.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Houston Community College System v. Wilson that support the summary and concepts above.
Mr. Wilson does not possess an actionable First Amendment claim arising from the Board's purely verbal censure.
Elected representatives are expected to shoulder a degree of criticism about their public service from their constituents and their peers.
The censure did not prevent Mr. Wilson from doing his job, it did not deny him any privilege of office.
