## Facts

- Ulysses Tory, a former client of attorney Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr., began picketing outside Cochran’s office years after Cochran had withdrawn from representing him.
- Cochran sued in California state court for defamation and privacy based on Tory’s public accusations, signs, and chants, which the trial court found false and defamatory.
- Rather than awarding damages, the trial court entered a permanent injunction broadly barring Tory and his agents from picketing, displaying signs, or making oral statements about Cochran and his firm in any public forum.
- The California Court of Appeal affirmed, and the California Supreme Court denied review.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari; after oral argument, Cochran died and his widow was substituted as respondent.
- Tory argued the case was not moot because the injunction remained in effect and continued to restrain his speech.

## Issues

1. Whether Cochran’s death rendered the First Amendment challenge to the injunction moot where the injunction remained in force.
2. Whether, after Cochran’s death, the continuing injunction constituted an unconstitutional, overly broad prior restraint on speech.

## Decision

- The Court substituted Cochran’s widow as respondent.
- The Court held the case was not moot because the injunction remained operative and continued to restrain petitioners’ speech under threat of enforcement.
- The Court vacated the judgment upholding the injunction and remanded, concluding that, in light of Cochran’s death, the injunction functioned as an overly broad prior restraint lacking plausible justification.
- Justices Thomas and Scalia dissented.

## Legal Principles

- A case is not moot when an injunction remains in effect and continues to impose significant, ongoing restraints, even if subsequent events raise uncertainty about the injunction’s enforceability.
- A prior restraint in the form of an injunction against speech must have a continuing, plausible justification; changed circumstances can eliminate the rationale for a broad speech restriction.
- Courts must reassess equitable speech restraints when the factual basis supporting the injunction materially changes; an indefinite ban on public speech may become unconstitutional when its original justification disappears.

## Conclusion

The Court held that the continuing injunction kept the dispute live despite the plaintiff’s death, but that the sweeping prohibition on any public speech about Cochran or his firm could no longer be justified and therefore had to be vacated and remanded as an overly broad prior restraint.


Tory v. Cochran, 544 U.S. 734 (2005)