Also known as: facially valid · facially invalid · facial invalidity
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A determination whether a statute or ordinance violates constitutional norms in every application when measured solely against its text as enacted. The inquiry focuses on the law's facial language rather than its enforcement against particular parties. A facial challenge succeeds only when the measure is invalid across its entire sweep.
Flora Ford challenged a city rule banning all signs near public buildings. The ordinance reached political protests and commercial notices alike. Because the text swept in a substantial volume of protected expression relative to its legitimate applications, the court declared the rule facially invalid.
Fusion Power sought to fund a documentary criticizing a candidate. Federal rules barred corporations from using general treasury funds for such speech. The court examined the statute's text and held it facially invalid under the First Amendment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Frank Fisher burned a cross on private property. A local ordinance punished only cross burnings that conveyed racial hatred. The court reviewed the ordinance's language and concluded it was facially invalid because it singled out disfavored viewpoints.
Freya Freeman, a physician, faced prosecution under a state criminal abortion law. She attacked the statute's text before any enforcement against her patients. The court assessed the law's facial validity and found it unconstitutional in all applications.
Ferrum Metals owned apartments subject to a new rent-control measure. The company claimed the ordinance's text effected a taking in every case. The court evaluated the measure's facial validity under the Takings Clause and upheld it.
Fatou Fall applied to a state medical school under a fixed racial quota system. She challenged the admissions matrix on its face. The court examined the policy's text and declared it facially invalid under the Equal Protection Clause.
The challenger must show that the statute prohibits a substantial amount of protected speech when judged against its plainly legitimate sweep. The burden rests on the party attacking the law. If that showing fails, the statute remains enforceable against unprotected conduct.
Supporting sources
A facial challenge attacks the statute's text as unconstitutional in every situation. An as-applied challenge contends only that the law is invalid when enforced against the particular plaintiff. Facial challenges are harder to win because they require invalidity across the board.
Supporting sources
A facial challenge may be brought as soon as the ordinance is enacted. The court evaluates the text alone to decide whether the measure is unconstitutional in every respect. Success requires showing the ordinance exceeds the enacting body's authority on its face.
Supporting sources
An indictment valid on its face is generally sufficient to proceed to trial. Lower courts have read this rule to bar most evidentiary attacks on the grand jury's decision. Challenges framed as prosecutorial misconduct may still be considered in limited circumstances.
Supporting sources
…entirely. Pp. 163-166. 7. Measured against these standards, the Texas abortion laws are unconstitutional. Pp. 164-166. 8. The facial invalidity of the Texas abortion laws does not require that all state abortion laws be invalidated. Pp. 166-167. Majority opinion Opinion of Blackmun, J. We forthwith acknowledge our…