ABSTRACT
The vagueness doctrine finds its roots in the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution and may be applied to cases involving criminal law or freedom of speech. The Court struck down the law on vagueness grounds because it could be used to punish individuals merely for expressing unpopular views. In Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 US 385, the US Supreme Court expressed concern about statutes that were so vague that they required people of common intelligence to guess at their meaning, and that differed as to how they were applied. Courts are generally reluctant to let individuals assert the rights of others. When constitutional rights are involved, the courts have typically required plaintiffs to establish "standing." Despite its reluctance, the Court sometimes permits facial challenges, particularly when free speech is implicated.
