Key to solve tyranny

The issue of institutional competence is closely related to protection of individual freedoms. In the words of Justice Brennan, "The requirement that government articulate its aims with a reasonable degree of clarity ensures that state power will be exercised on half of policies reflecting an authoritative choice among competing social values." The vagueness doctrine often reflects a balancing of interests, in which the decision whether or not to find a statute unconstitutionally vague depends on the type of conduct that the legislature is seeking to prevent. For example, in Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, the Court invalidated a vagrancy ordinance on vagueness grounds because the ordinance criminalized "activities [that] are historically part of the amenities of life as we have known them,” including strolling, wandering and walking at night. In contrast, in Grayned v. City of Rockford, an antinoise ordinance that pro making noise near a school in session that "tended to disturb” the school's functioning was upheld against a vagueness challenge because the law's purpose was to prevent the disruption of normal school activity. In general, statutes restricting conduct seen by the Court as within the legitimate realm of government regulation tend to survive vagueness challenges, while statutes exceeding the legitimate reach of government control tend to fall as overly vague.