Last Friday, a federal district court in Florida found that the City of Tampa’s restriction on requests for donation or payment—aimed at preventing panhandling and solicitation on city streets—violated the First Amendment. The court’s decision follows on several other decisions around the country that have invalidated bans on solicitation of donations on the grounds that such bans are not content neutral.
Continue Reading Tampa Panhandling Ban Found Unconstitutional
In Puerto Rico, Private Roads are a Public Forum
This post was authored by Otten Johnson summer law clerk Matt Bender. Matt is a rising third-year law student at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.
Recently, the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, in Watchtower Bible Tract Society of New York v. Municipality of Ponce, decided that streets built and maintained by a small, gated community and never deeded to the local municipality, were a public forum. The court prohibited the neighborhood and its guards from excluding the plaintiffs, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and ordered the municipality to affirmatively ensure that the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights would be protected.
Continue Reading In Puerto Rico, Private Roads are a Public Forum
Photography May Be Protected Speech, But Village’s Restriction on Park Photography Stands
Last week, a court in Missouri ruled that a village’s ordinance prohibiting commercial activity—including commercial photography—in a park was a constitutional restriction on speech.
The Village of Twin Oaks, Missouri had an ordinance that prohibited the use of a village park for commercial purposes. The park was posted with signage that read: “No commercial activity, including commercial photographers.” The stated purpose for the village’s regulation was to ensure public safety and fair use of the park. Josephine Havlak was a professional photographer who takes pictures for wedding and portrait purposes. After Havlak filed suit claiming that the ordinance was a content based and unconstitutional restriction on speech, the village modified the ordinance to allow commercial photographers to use the park in exchange for a $100 permit fee.
Continue Reading Photography May Be Protected Speech, But Village’s Restriction on Park Photography Stands
Seventh Circuit Finds Fort Wayne Bus Advertising Policy Unreasonable
In a case that we reported on earlier this year, last month, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an Indiana district court’s grant of summary judgment to the Fort Wayne public transit system, Citilink, holding that the transit company’s rejection of an advertisement for a healthcare organization was unreasonable in light of Citilink’s advertising policy.
Continue Reading Seventh Circuit Finds Fort Wayne Bus Advertising Policy Unreasonable
Court Grants Preliminary Injunction in Connection with Syracuse Pride Week Festivities; Buffer Zone Not a Narrowly Tailored Restriction on Speech
As organizers here in Denver make final preparations for PrideFest this weekend, we report on a case stemming from a similar event scheduled in Syracuse, New York.
A plaintiff who had been prevented from protesting Pride Week in Syracuse in both 2014 and 2015 filed a motion in federal court seeking a preliminary injunction to enjoin the city from restricting the plaintiff’s ability to demonstrate at the upcoming Pride Week festival. In 2014 and 2015, the plaintiff positioned himself on the sidewalk immediately adjacent to the festival’s entrance with a banner and a voice amplifier, and attempted to “explain[] [his] beliefs to those nearby.” However, each year, city police officers approached the plaintiff and asked him to move across the street from the festival entrance. According to video footage taken by the plaintiff, the police officer who approached the plaintiff in 2014 justified his request by stating that the festival organizers’ permit entitled them to exclusive use of the sidewalk area immediately adjacent to the festival entrance. The police officer who approached the plaintiff in 2015 explained that the festival organizers were entitled to a 40-foot buffer on the area surrounding the festival entrance.
Continue Reading Court Grants Preliminary Injunction in Connection with Syracuse Pride Week Festivities; Buffer Zone Not a Narrowly Tailored Restriction on Speech
Third Circuit Revives Challenge to Pittsburgh’s Abortion Clinic “Buffer Zone” Ordinance, Portends of More Litigation to Come
This post was authored by Otten Johnson summer law clerk Alex Gano. Alex is a rising third-year law student at the University of Colorado Law School.
On June 1, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated a lower federal court’s dismissal of a First Amendment challenge to a City of Pittsburgh ordinance that created a fifteen-foot “buffer zone” around entrances to abortion clinics. The lower court dismissed the challenge filed by five self-described “sidewalk counselors” based on a 2009 opinion by the Third Circuit that upheld the same ordinance. Writing for the Court, Judge Kent Jordan interpreted the Supreme Court’s decision in McCullen v. Coakley to compel a more vigorous “narrow-tailoring” analysis to burdens on speech. Judge Jordan’s opinion also implies that McCullen will have the effect of prolonging litigation over buffer zone ordinances, which have become a cutting edge of First Amendment jurisprudence in recent years.
Continue Reading Third Circuit Revives Challenge to Pittsburgh’s Abortion Clinic “Buffer Zone” Ordinance, Portends of More Litigation to Come
Federal Judge Enjoins Enforcement of Maine “Noise Provision” as Not Content-Neutral
This post was authored by Otten Johnson summer law clerk Alex Gano. Alex is a rising third-year law student at the University of Colorado Law School.
On May 23, a federal judge in Maine issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of a portion of that State’s Civil Rights Act that prohibited “making noise” with the intention of either “jeopardize[ing] the health of persons receiving health services” or “interfer[ing] with the safe and effective delivery” of health services. The ruling in March v. Mills—together with another opinion issued by a federal appellate court in Pennsylvania nine days later—mark the latest chapter in a twenty-year jurisprudential saga on the constitutionality of speech restrictions around abortion clinics.
Continue Reading Federal Judge Enjoins Enforcement of Maine “Noise Provision” as Not Content-Neutral
Chicago Fails to Transform Airport Advertising Space to a Non-Public Forum; Disgruntled Pilots’ Ad is Permitted
Earlier this month, a federal district court granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) in favor of the Southwest Airlines’ Pilots Association (SWAPA), directing the City of Chicago to allow an ad proposed by SWAPA to be displayed in the Chicago Midway Airport. The ad (see here) depicts a Southwest pilot holding a sign that reads “Shareholder Returns: $3.1 Billion. Pilot Raises: $0.” Acknowledging that a TRO is an “extraordinary” remedy, the court nonetheless granted it in light of an upcoming Southwest Airlines shareholders’ meeting where pilot compensation would be discussed.
Continue Reading Chicago Fails to Transform Airport Advertising Space to a Non-Public Forum; Disgruntled Pilots’ Ad is Permitted
Appeals Court: Wrigley Field Peddling Ordinance Not a First Amendment Violation
On Monday, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals determined that Chicago’s ban on the peddling of merchandise on sidewalks adjacent to Wrigley Field was a constitutional time, place, and manner regulation that survived intermediate scrutiny. The ordinance was challenged by Left Field Media, which publishes a magazine called Chicago Baseball and sells copies outside of Wrigley Field before Chicago Cubs home games. Chicago’s “Adjacent Sidewalks Ordinance” prohibits peddling merchandise on any sidewalk adjacent to Wrigley Field, for the purpose of allowing safe pedestrian passage. Because the Adjacent Sidewalks Ordinance prohibited the sale of all merchandise—“[t]he ordinance applies as much to sales of bobblehead dolls and baseball jerseys as it does to the sale of printed matter”—the appeals court found that the ordinance was content neutral in light of Reed v. Town of Gilbert. The appeals court’s decision upholds the prior denial by a federal district judge of the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
Continue Reading Appeals Court: Wrigley Field Peddling Ordinance Not a First Amendment Violation
Preliminary Injunction Granted to Animal Rights Activists in Pennsylvania Convention Center Case
Late last month, a federal court found that a group of animal rights activists was entitled to a preliminary injunction relating to the group’s protest activities outside of Mohegan Sun Arena in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
The arena in question is owned by a public convention center authority but is operated by a private management company, SMG. In 2008, SMG promulgated a protest policy that required protestors to remain located in a parking area outside of the arena. The protest policy limited protestors’ ability to approach attendees at public events and to distribute literature. In March 2016, SMG revised the protest policy to allow two designated protest areas of approximately 500 to 700 square feet, and located closer to the entrance gates of the arena. The plaintiffs, including Silvie Pomicter and Last Chance for Animals sought to protest outside of the arena during the Barnum and Bailey Circus, which took place at the arena between April 28 and May 1.
Continue Reading Preliminary Injunction Granted to Animal Rights Activists in Pennsylvania Convention Center Case