signlaw.com

Welcome to Randal Morrison's signlaw.com, an informational website on the American law of signs, billboards, outdoor advertising, newsracks, public forum and other First Amendment / zoning topics.

SIGN REGULATION - PUBLIC FORUM BULLETIN - a free newsletter featuring quick-read summaries of new cases on sign regulation, public forum and related topics, distributed only by email. Read the Fall 2008 issue here, the Spring 2008 issue here, the Summer 2007 issue here, and the Summer 2006 issue here.

If you wish to receive future issues of the free newsletter, register here.

A survey of past cases on signs and billboards decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

U.S. SUPREME COURT - CURRENT AND RECENT CASES

Religious Monument: A city park in Pleasant Grove UT contains several historical displays, including a Ten Commandments (TC) monument donated by the Eagles, a private group, in 1971. In 2003 a religious group called Summum requested permission to place a physically similar monument with its "Seven Aphorisms" in the same park; the city council denied permission saying the Summum monument was not related to the history of the city. On appeal, the 10^th Circuit: said: 1) the park is a traditional public forum; 2) the exclusion of Summum’s monument was content based and not sufficiently justified; and 3) the trial court must grant a preliminary injunction (allowing Summum to erect a monument in the park.) Summum v. Pleasant Grove, 483 F.3d 1044 (10^th Cir. No. 06-4057, 2007). Cert granted 3/31/08, 128 S.Ct. 1737. Issue: did the city adopt the Eagles TC monument as its own speech? Oral argument 11/12/08.

Info on Summum religion: www.summum.org.

"Choose Life" License Plates. The Ninth Circuit held that a "choose life" message on state-issued license plates was private speech, not government speech. Arizona Life Coalition v. Stanton, 515 F.3d 956 (9^th Cir. No. 05-16971, 1/28/08); cert denied 10/6/08, No. 07-1366. Contrast: ACLU v. Bredesen, 441 F.3d 370 (6^th Cir. 2006) ("Choose Life" plates were government speech) and Choose Life Illinois v. White, __ F.3d __, 2008 WL 4821759 (7^th Cir. No. 07-1349, Nov. 7, 2008) (specialty plates implicate private speech in a nonpublic forum; extended discussion of the issue. The State’s exclusion of all abortion-related messages from specialty plates did not violate First Amendment.)

Signco Standing. The Georgia Supreme Court held that a billboard company could challenge only those parts of a sign ordinance which actually caused it harm. Granite State Outdoor v. Roswell, 283 Ga. 417, 658 SE2d 587, No. S07A1885 (3/10/08). Cert. denied 10/6/2008, NO. 08-50. For a survey of federal cases on the same issue, see: Maverick Media v. Hillsborough County, 528 F.3d 817 (11^th Cir. No. 07-12330, 5/22/08) (all reaching essentially the same conclusion; more cases on standing, in the Fall 2008 newsletter; link above).

Teachers’ Mailboxes. School’s mailbox policy, requiring approval before teachers could distribute flyers, did not violate free speech rights of a teacher. Policastro v. Kontogiannis, 262 Fed.Appx. 429 (3d Cir. 2008). Cert denied 10/06/2008, No. 07-1341.

Parade Permits. City law requiring parade sponsors to pay costs of traffic control and clean-up was valid as a reasonable "time, place and manner" rule. No "indigency exception" was required. Sullivan v. Augusta, 511 F.3d 16 (1^st Cir. 2007). Cert denied 10/06/08, No. 07-1500.

MORE US SUPREME COURT RECENT CASES: here.

A survey of U.S. Supreme Court past cases on signs and billboards.