Palmer v. City of Euclid/Concurrence Harlan

Mr. Justice HARLAN concurs in the result.

Mr. Justice STEWART, with whom Mr. Justice DOUGLAS joins, concurring.

While I agree with the Court that Euclid's 'suspicious person ordinance' is unconstitutional as applied to the appellant, I would go further and hold that the ordinance is unconstitutionally vague on its face.

A policeman has a duty to investigate suspicious circumstances, and the circumstance of a person wandering the streets late at night without apparent lawful business may often present the occasion for police inquiry. But in my view government does not have constitutional power to make that circumstance, without more, a criminal offense.