Between 1880 and 1930, the legal regulation of democratic politics in the United States underwent a transformation. The dissertation argues that the change was more significant than has previously been recognized. The transformation extended well beyond reforming the rules governing elections. Changes took place across the spectrum of nineteenth-century political practices (including juries, assemblies in public, and access to the legislative agenda). Moreover, the changes fundamentally restructured the relationship between the state and the democratic public sphere.

In making these claims, the dissertation looks in depth at changes in the legal regulation of public assemblies. It documents the rise of municipal ordinances requiring permits for gatherings in public places after 1880, through a study of municipal codes.

Case studies of regulatory change in three cities provide windows into the processes that brought forth the new ordinances as well as the political and legal contests over them. The experiences of these cities indicate that, unlike the other legal reforms of democratic practices during this period, this regulatory change was not the product of a coherent reform movement. In fact, the new ordinances were not exactly a reform. They were not adopted to improve the practice of public assembly or to remedy regulatory quandaries. Rather, they were expedient means for prohibiting particular groups from using particular public places.

The change was controversial. State supreme courts were initially reluctant to accept the ordinances as a lawful exercise of municipal power. After the United States Supreme Court's decision in Davis v. Massachusetts (1897), however, the tide turned for litigation against permit requirements.

Finally, the change had unintended effects on democratic practice. The thesis throughout is not that there was a transition from nonregulation to regulation. The argument instead is that the nature of state regulation changed with major implications for the relative autonomy of the democratic public sphere.